Pakistan Think Tank

Why Pakistan Should Be Impregnable with Nuclear & Missile Power

Read here excerpts of Hindus speaking their mind in Quora.com-An Anti-Pakistan Indian infested Hate Site

The question isn’t as much as “What would happen if China and Pakistan attacked India?” rather is it possible China would join Pakistan to attack India on Pakistan’s insistence? And the answer is – a clear, big NO.

Why? Let’s analyze!

Pakistan has lost face everywhere with everyone. UAE doesn’t give it a damn. Nor does Iran. Nor does Saudi Arabia. Nor does Egypt nor does Turkey. Pakistan’s relations with Eurasian nations are – non-existent, with middle east – strained, with India – in dire straits and with the USA-UK-France-Germany – dying. Forget the big ones, Pakistan is unsuccessful at wooing even comparatively small nations such as Afghanistan and Bangladesh. There is not one country in the world which is willing to stand with Pakistan, save for China.

Now, the question is – will China go so far as to fight a war for Pakistan? Well, any sane analyst would answer that will a loud and clear NO.

China didn’t become a global power because of friendship with Pakistan, rather Pakistan is friends with China because it’s a regional superpower. Whereas China wouldn’t mind flattering Pakistan, massage it’s ego occasionally, it won’t fight a war for it. The reason is simple:

(1) China won’t fight a war. It didn’t become a global power by fighting wars. It grew by doing business. It wouldn’t jeopardize it’s trade with a big a nation such as India and with other nations as a cascading effect.

(2) Even if China fights someone, there will have something big for China in it. Fighting alongside Pakistan for what essentially is a brazen rocky land with no human population will be a very foolish step by China. China won’t be so foolish.

(3) In any case, whether China joins Pakistan in attacking India, or Pakistan uses it as an opportunity to attack India when it’s engaged with China, it will not remain a low intensity fight. It will escalate into a full-scale war, which will be devastating for the entire south Asia.

In case such a full scale war breaks out, USA and Japan will immediately join the war either directly or indirectly. Russia will be reluctant to join the war due to India factor but may extend some indirect military support to China. If the situation worsens, Vietnam, Philippines and Taiwan may join India to take the fight to Chinese mainland.India will mobilize it’s navy to destroy Pakistan beyond recognition in less than 48 hours. USA and Japan will exercise it’s naval and air power to bombard Chinese cities on eastern coast. Cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Shandong, Fuzhou, Guangzhou may suffer damages that will take decades to repair.

In the aftermath to the war:

(1) Pakistan may cease to exist. Baluchistan may become a sovereign nation. Remaining Punjab will be merged in Indian Punjab. KPK, Gilgit, Baltistan areas will go to Afghanistan, and Kashmir will be integrated fully into India giving it an autonomy.

Chinese business will suffer extreme damages taking the country back by at least a decade.

India will go back by a decade or more on it’s development, but in the future the progress will be fast, as the enduring peace post war due to a stable region lacking hostility will allow it to grow at a much faster pace without worrying about hostile neighborhood. The money India currently spends on military modernization, it will spend of building infrastructure and within a decade it will be completely back on its feet. Only bigger, stronger and commanding more respect.

Firstly, I don’t think such scenario is possible. China is smart enough to not to wage war against one its biggest markets for its product and inviting all the economic troubles in the current economic conditions.

Secondly, Lets assume if both China & Pakistan attack India at the same point in time, what are the various possibilities:

1. India will be incurring majority losses. Given the strength and capabilities of both the enemies, Indian forces definitely can’t handle both at the same time. But equal blows will be to Pakistan & China as well. India might loose at the end of the war (if it fights it all alone) but the damage done to China & Pakistan will be huge as well. India has one of the best missile technologies that it can target any part of China & Pakistan (Land to land marking). There is a possibility that if everything goes to much out of the hand, India might also think of using its Nukes (Now to the counter argument that both China & Pakistan are nuclear powers as well, The one who strikes first might have the possibilities to stop the war, or it can be used as a bargaining chip).

2. India’s allies especially the ones who are either against China Or Pakistan will come to support India, to name a few Japan, Israel, Iran, US, France etc. Their are lesser probabilities of France joining in, but if US supports India (because it’ll give it a purpose to fight China) many of the countries from Europe & England might join in India’s favor. And if that happens, I don’t need to say much, we might also get the entire Kashmir, our China captured area back at the end of it. Some extra territory might be the bonus. But Even if they not, Only Iran & Japan (both have extremely good relations with India) are enough to balance it out as China & Japan will be engaged on the other side of Chinese borders. Pakistan too will have to deploy its forces on Iran’s border, hence the focus will shift and then given the size of India’s army/navy/airforce. India can handle both on its top borders.

3. Pakistan will definitively be ruined. Because of its location & capabilities it’s an easy target for India. India might first try to go after Pakistan first, use its navy/air force/army to do the maximum damage their and than take it to China. You might say, till that China must have done huge damage to India but in a war going on damage is certain. Handling both simultaneously and making sure you win the war will be difficult. So India’s focus might shift to do maximum damage to both the countries. And given the size of Pakistan being very small compared to India & China. It will definitely be destroyed. And after that whosoever wins at the end India/China, both will continue to exists. Our population & Size is big enough that we can’t be completely destroyed. Our territory might get shorted but at the end of it, China & India will still exists. Pakistan, I think have dim chances.

Lastly, I still think, such a scenario is not going to happen. India is a smart country. They have solid foreign ties especially with countries against China & Pakistan. We are much powerful then Pakistan and in any scenario it will be difficult for Pakistan to afford a big war. China is heavily dependent on India, it’s the worlds largest exporter and we are one of the biggest Importers. Ours is the largest, economically capable middle class market in the world. Growing tension with India, China will loose Indian markets, and we all talk about modern day warfare, but most crucial of the warfare is Economics, and we have done enough good their. That its better for most of the countries of the world to be friends with India rather than being enemies. Even lets say China, all what media shows is that China is India’s enemy. I think it was but not now. Even if you read about China’s argument of not supporting India’s NSG membership it’s more because of distrust it has on Pakistan. Their is no point against India in it. So China will most likely not want to wage in any war with India for next 30–40 years at least. But since you asked it hypothetically, I have answered in the same fashion.

So there’s a if added to the question, so I will try to give a practical answer.

If China and Pakistan would attack India at the same time,then INDIA IS WRECKED.

YES, Offensive it may sound to most of the Indians but it’s the bitter truth.

Possible results of war-:

India losing a significant Part of its territories .

Loss of man and money.

Possible nuclear attacks.

Economic crisis.

Downfall of Indian growth by 20 years.

Consider,Pakistan to be a motorcycle,India car and china a mini truck.Now what happens when both the countries attack India.

Whenever there is a clash between,motor cycle and car it’s obvious and practical car will bear a huge loss,no matter how badly both collided or even if its a one sided collision also.Now,consider when this damaged car is put against the mini truck what will happen to the car.No doubt,it will get wrecked. So will India.

Pakistan,is obvious will start from the LoC and the Rajasthan borders,with a huge amount of its tank capacity,it will try to enter the international borders,Now Indian military knows they need almost 2/3 of their troops in every field to stop that attack,so they will likewise plan them and position them.

Now,when 2/3 of your military forces are already enrolled defending your western borders, who will guard the Northen and eastern borders.Now,it becomes practically too difficult for the units to cover the distance in a single day from one border in west to other in East.

Now,China in every field is superior to India,be it the army,weapons,aircrafts or even the transport facilities.They have everything available for their soldiers right at the place they need.

Now,when 2/3 of the Indian army is busy fighting against Pakistan then how will the remaining soldiers deal with the Chinese army for which India originally had 3/4 available and 2/3 of which are busy right now.

So,it would be impossible for India to go through this kind of war and survive.Similar condition arrived in 1965 war,when India was fighting Pakistan then during that time China favoured Pakistan with all aid and military equipment and findings of 60 million$.So as India agreed on declaring ceasefire as one of the major concerns was constant interuption of China in the war,and if China would have come along Pakistan than everybody knew that IT WOULD BRING HAVOC IN INDIA.

As,the above scenario is hypothetical,but if this ever comes true than in simple words INDIA is DOOMED.

The EU will play honest broker and sell arms to India and China all the time it’s media will praise India and its Govt will support China. Russia will most probably do the same, play honest broker to both sides.

In short- WW3 may take place (big IFF).

Summary- Pakistan will get obliterated, India will face massive losses and go back 25 years, China will lose badly if the US or Russia enter against it else will win big.

China has a border dispute with India in where they disagree on where the border should be drawn, they have no interest in conquering India or anything silly like that.

Perhaps more importantly, now the USA have set such precedence, war will never be declared between major countries ever again, they’ll just go ahead and do it (the USA never declared war against Vietnam, Iraq , Afghanistan.)

I can’t improve on bhavya kundu’s answer. But I have a slightly different perspective.

I think the war will be limited and short. Any largescale action will invariably include nukes. So here is what I think India will do

Pressurize Bangladesh to provide access to road network for Evacuating civilians.
Follow a scorched earth policy while rapidly retreating from NE
Invade Tibet through chumbi valley and use the sizeable refugee population to stir up trouble there
Bomb the karakoram highway out of existence
Disect pakistan at its “waist” using mechanized infantry. Kill the generals. It is a centralized sham democracy run by military. Once the leaders are gone they will take a long time to recover
Blockade Karachi port. Destroy all fuel storages in Pakistan. Stir up Baluchistan.
Let loose CRPF to decimate Maoists. Constitutional rights take a hike.
Indian Muslims come out in solidarity to openly denounce and lynch terrorists. Believe me, they will. If you don’t believe me, look at stats of communal issues in war years. Its like the kaurava-pandava thing – twixt us we are a hundred and a five, when an outsider raises his banner we are 105.
Mountain corps totally block up Siliguri corridor. The canals are breached in Bangla border to impede chinese armoured corps. Bangla asks for protection. All road/rail/bridges in assam Tripura border with Bangla bombed by IAF.
Ladakh is fortified with a totally defensive doctrine. But special forces drawn from gorkha/garhwali regiments harass Chinese logistics begin enemy lines. Dog fights all along border. India invades Tibet.
India confiscates every single petroleum barge to china. A large vessel waits near Malacca, ready to be scuttled.
Pakistan surrenders in the meanwhile. Indian troops withdraw after destroying every strategic installation.
By now India has called its western border, lost all of northeast east of Siliguri, gained some foothold in Tibet and hopefully have not ceded Ladakh west of chushul.
World intervenes. Armistice signed. Talks drag on.
India stays reticent till December. On Christmas eve indian migs fly out of aircraft carrier in bay of Bengal and bomb Chinese positions in north east India. Missiles with conventional warheads fly. Fatchance the Chinese can replenish logistics once winter sets in. India takes back northeast but tawang is lost.
Now India accepts status quo antebellum, if offered. If not post war positions are held
Aftermath
Economy in tatters.
North eastern people lose faith in India for deserting them in the beginning and “scorching their earth”.
Pakistan finally cowed.
India begs USA to let it in to NATO whatever the price.
UNO is once again exposed to be the sham that it is. But it as usually is not ashamed.
Russia was fence-sitting and making money. It was selling arms to India through Iran all these past few days at astronomical costs and
energy to china the same way.
Suggestions welcome. Off the cuff answer.

It will be called as the “Doomsday”, not for India but for the whole world.

World War III will break out. Not believing me!! Look at the South China Sea. America has always been against the rise of Chinese. When World War II ended and UNSC formed, the US wanted India to be a permanent member so to have powers distributed in ASIA.

The war will not last long, with U.S, Japan, Australia, Afghanistan and ASEAN countries on our side, unless Russia take China’s side to seek a revenge on US. China has good ties with many African and Arab countries, and with some of our neighbours but they are highly unlikely to support any of the sides and most probably will remain neutral (I am little uncertain about Sri-Lanka). European nation will keep their involvement the least as they have learned their lessons from WWI and WWII.

But the over all picture will be the destruction of the Republic of China and Pakistan.

In the present scenario where world economy is trembling, a full flung war is not possible at-least for China but there is a possibility of a pseudo war. China and Pakistan are allies and are developing many nuclear and military technologies together. China can use Pakistan as a pawn against India if a war broke out between India and Pakistan, it can provide military aid and much needed economic aid to Pakistan.

Without external help of Chinese, Pakistan is not strong enough to directly get involve with India but given its history it is possible that Pakistan may get involved with India in an act of war. This will be catastrophic for all the South Asian countries and the world including China as the Indian ocean, which is a major trade region, will be a war zone.

Hence, China can corner India with Pakistan on one side and China on other. But Pakistan alone does not have enough military power to be a threat to India.

BUT For now it is highly unlikely for any rational country to get involve in any kind of war as all the world economies are connected and any disturbance can slow the world economy even further. India is a big market for manufacturing country like China and China will never want to loose India. It may be involved in some minor activities but overall China will never want to make India its enemy. India has some very strong international relations and its economy is booming even in the age of recession, its military is now the world’s 4th strongest and population world’s 2nd. To get involved with India will certainly be a unrecoverable loss for any country specially China.

Although its not directly linked with the question still its worth to read:

Those who wants India pak war :

While Pakistanis and Indians post stupid war jokes, somewhere a mother of a soldier silently sheds a tear and prays for her son’s safety.

If war is there : Loss of resources, Huge impact on Economy, International relations of the country, growth rate, FDI, development, education will get hampered. Nuclear power is big worry. Unnecessary political drama will be There. In nutshell, abi jo pesa education and development pe lagta h bad m wo Yudh pe lagega.

From above link I have to consider some points only. Although all are nuclear capable nation and if nuclear weapon are not used against each other. Since china and India have mountainous border so tank and all heavy vehicle cant be put in use by Chinese army they have to be very dependent on air-force. Since China and Pakistan both operate on Chinese Technology which is re engineered Russian Jets. So, you they can be comparable but not good. So, in the air whole action will go on between China and India . Pakistan and India will be fighting on ground mostly. But Pakistan Army lacks in inventory as compared to India. There air-force lack of new generation planes and Tank, artillery and on naval front Pakistan can be said to be most backward. Pakistan can’t maintain long fight. India will have to vary about only air because it has to face more 1.5 to 1.8 times large fleet of aircraft. In my opinion this war may not be clearly won by any country. But considering India longstanding friendship and relation with Russia and US it may be possible that they would asset India fightback(Pact was signed between USSR and India which Russia Federation still follow). So, person who had asked this should not worry about it.

Currently, China is facing lots of difficulties in south china sea with its neighbor so it will not take on India in next 5 year atleast until it could resolve it.

Well answers have a sense of patriotism and some where criticism.
I would take on this question in two heads:

Feasibility:- the probability of conventional conflict hapenning is minimal. What we are going to see in near future is limited cease fire violations and occational rebukes under local military commanders name without any political backing. As it has been already mentioned that Pakistan is too poor and China is too rich. A economic blow caused by war will Result in bankrupt Pakistan and pushing China 10 years behind. This is apart from nuclear deterrence.

Result:- lets say the hypothetical war comes true. Well Pakistan will be trashed. And after devastation may fall prey to further partition or civil war amongst fundamentalist factions. For China . I would say the war will go unresolved. Now there are reasons for that. China’s military might is based on reverse engineering and the weapon platforms in vogue there have incurred catastrophic failures during operations. Over and above that it is the leadership and military strategy which decides the outcome of war. With such a long border there can be endless opportunities which if realised can lead to huge damage to Chinese forces. And there are enough resources with India to realise these strategies in terms of crisis. After the unresolved war China and India may retreat to their positions with minor skirmishes. And would never wage a war against each other.

Alternatives:- Nation is not a natural entity. Nationalism thus is observed to safeguard common interests of homogenous people. If in daily life we count our interests other than basic ones they are economic, social and personal freedom. India is a complex democracy preserving interests of varied people. China under communist rule is a democracy with well known restrictions. China had suppressed many voices in past. If seen closely the socialist economy serves interests of only few. Pakistan is a fabricated democracy which needs fabrication every decade. It serves interests of feudal Lords and military generals. Both the later nations have tried to fuel anti national movements in India, but till date they have failed because India still provides the very essential element for growth of all that is freedom. But if India starts fueling such propaganda wars against two if its neighbours, the required effects will be visible in a decade. China may disintegrate into smaller states like USSR erstwhile. And Pakistan is undergoing such phenomenon on its own. To summarise no nation has ability to openly confront other. Also it is in no ones interests as all three hold key strategic geographical features and in today’s world everything is money.

more than two billion people at war. Definitely it will lead to world war 3 if it is an all out war not some escalated skirmish.
This is a highly unlikely scenario. reason being India and China are already at war.
In earlier days traditional wars were fought but now a days it is a battle of dominance at industrial and financial level. These days wars are fought politically rather than in the conventional manner.

Lets say if all three get into a fight, an all out war, what will happen is rest of the world economies will fall rapidly.China is a major player in manufacturing sector and India in services sector.Think of a scenario that all of the corporate sector in India comes to a halt what will it’s impact on rest of the world. A lot of major banks,Automobile manufacturers, mobile manufacturers,Industries from sectors of coaling, mining and petroleum,Healthcare related sector around the world is dependent on work done in India on daily Basis.These MNC’s not working for a week will create havoc around the world and this is me speaking only about India with respect to it’s services based sector.Think of similar things happening at China’s end in the manufacturing sector.

If china wants to attack India it will make sure it does so with minimum expenses. An all out war is a very big financial expense. USA has spent 4.4 Trillion dollars in wars fought in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. making such huge expenses with nothing to gain from why would china do so? Also lets say china attacks India and wins. the next thing that will happen will be china being attacked by both USA and Russia.why?
1. china will be weak and an easy target.
2. USA will gain a part on this side of the planet which will help it control other countries of east.
3. Russia understanding USA’s intention wouldn’t want this to happen.
and there are lots of such reasons.

During the war after a few days Pakistan will resort to Nuclear weapon which most of the countries wouldn’t want it to use because if it uses a nuclear enabled missile India will also Nuke it and then it will not take much time before everyone pulls out their nuclear arsenal Leading to world war 3. result: everyone dies. Nuclear Winter.

Understand this. We are at war. we have already defeated Pakistan and as of now we are fighting China.This is an unconventional war. Pakistan is already having lot of turmoils in it’s own country.Most of the world already see them as a terrorist supporting country.Very soon they will have an economic break down with no support from outside if their political situations remains similar.we Indians have more money, more people most of which are young generation. we are considered as good people around the world and now we have a great leader too . As of now we are racing against china and we are at advantage due to our younger population.They have better infrastructure and more resources. 20-25 years down the line the country with more dominance around the world economically and more influence at UN level with a young workforce and industries to support future generations will be the country which comes out of this battle as victorious.

Let us imagine the premier of China and Pakistan decides one day over a morning coffee to attack India. China completely overseeing the economical conditions of the country which mostly depends on manufacturing sector Which is degrading amidst crisis in international economy calls for a war against India. People in China are more focused on improving the environmental conditions and supporting it’s manufacturing Industry rather than wasting their money, manpower on Some war which will not achieve them the above objectives but will create a negative impact on them. And regarding a country like Pakistan they can never sustain the cost of full scale war with India or with any other country. The country itself is becoming a blot on the world map for supporting terrorism. People in the country are suffering because of their leaders making arbitrary policies. Pakistan is also seeking help from many developed countries(mainly US) of which most of the countries share good relation with India so they can’t afford any international sanctions.I believe you get a good picture, In today’s world war is not the solution to a problem but a method to escalate the problem even more. If any how Pakistan and china attack India it would be difficult for India to support the war for a long time but before the war takes it toll other powerful countries will intervene and will resolve the matter due to the fact all these 3 countries possess nuclear arsenal. Thus, such a situation would not arise and even if it does, it would be futile.

Well, this question is kind of stupid… why would China want a war with its largest trade partner?

Worst case scenario it would fund Pakistan’s side even thought that is not very likel. Let’s say Both Pakistan and China attack India . Yes, it would be difficult for India as deploying troops on both the borders will not be easy and then if the war goes on they ill have only one option which none of us would want as it might have dangerous consequences: use a nuke.

If both of the countries do form a team against India the world will get involved. USA would be with India due to issues withChina and Pak. North Korea with China ofcourse. Russia is unpredictable but probably would be with India too. The Europian countries will not be directly involved. If this happens then off course the Indian side has a very high chance of a win.

But this should not happen,the above was a worst case scenario. Anything like that happening is very unlikely.

It’s not that people of these countries hate each other. They praise each other when it’s something good and vice versa.

The core aspect of any nation to wage war is its ability to run supply lines.

In case of Pakistan, they don’t have the resources to wage an escalating war. They cant even sustain a campaign for more than 2 weeks if the fighting is intense. Guns, tanks and ships don’t fall out of the sky. They are in limited supply and they get used really fast.

The Chinese will be the ones fighting on both the fronts and running supplies. Indian artillery can wreak havoc on these narrow supply lines as they pass through the Himalayas. Its really that simple. That’s the main reason there is no conflict. India has established its supply lines well in the country. China needs to stretch its supplies from its heartland to the mountains and that’s hard considering the many mountains it needs to pass through and the long distances they cover.

Also, Indian armed forces have been preparing for this for nearly 2 decades. Wars are not all about numbers. Its also about strategy, tactics and defenses. India has made sure that the enemy pays dearly for every square inch they gain. They are aware that they cant simply hold on to the incoming enemy. As a result, they have been preparing to bleed the invading forces crush them at choke points. They also have an offensive posture now where they gain major territory in lieu of losing minor ones. One must understand that India is the only nation in the subcontinent that has had real wars within the last 3 decades. Neither China nor Pakistan have had the kind of experience that we have.

To all those saying Russia is our ally or It will support and back us.
I would like to put a fact that, India does not have any strategical ally. Moreover, China and Russia shares more than India and Russia. They both are against USA. Russia is no true friend (Don’t freak out and downvote, I have proper proofs. Why Russia supported us in Ind n Pak war, there were also multiple reasons for that ) But still its better than USA and China to us.To the question,
China and Ind won’t clash together in a full fledged war, both being Emerging super powers and Economies don’t have time and resources for that.
BUT EVEN JUST IN CASE THEY DID, INDIA WILL BE ON LOSING END. HOWEVER, EVEN CHINA WOULD NOT BE LEFT MUCH TO CONTINUE.
ITS LIKE 1 BILLION VS 1 BILLION. Something Bigger than Mahabharata Will happen. China’s condition after Ind China full fledged war be like even Japan will come and smash it.
Millions of lives will be wasted, Economy will be hit back to like of 80’s or 90’s.
There was an article on some defence forum, India , China , America are some countries which can never be conquered. Reason being their physical geography.

About Pakistan, its already a failed country. I will never rule out the possibility of India Pakistan war in future. Surely this could happen.
We are very unlucky to have China and Pakistan as our neighbours.

Though Pakistan does not have power to attack, but has deterrence to protect it self if India enters their soil for attack. They have nuke weapons and they are stupid enough to use it.

INDIA CAN TAKE CARE OF PAKISTAN, THOUGH I WILL NEVER SAY IT WOULD BE A PEACE OF CAKE. BUT EVENTUALLY INDIA WILL WIN AND MAY NOT SUFFER VERY MUCH ON ECONOMY. (GIVEN THAT NO NUKES ARE EXCHANGED)

It will result in nuclear holocaust or defeat of both China and Pakistan.

Why two scenarios?
Its not a hidden fact that India will not able able to stand against China and Pakistan together. Any missile attack on Indian city will result in massive use of nuclear weapons from Indian side.

Countries like Russia, Japan, USA, Britain know that without Indian and Chinese market they won’t survive. Most probably they will stand against aggressor. So defeat of both China and Pakistan.

I don’t know the from which country the person asking this question comes from but the question asked is very naive. Someone who understands basic geo-politics of the Indian sub-continent would never talk of a Sino-Indian war in this era and I will tell you why.

India and China are very mature economies and led by seasoned politicians even though one is a communist ruled country and the other is a democracy. When mature economies disagree they talk, they don’t go to war directly. They fight proxies. We saw this during the Cold War when the Soviet Union was an equal rival to the USA. They never fought wars directly, they fought through Vietnam, Cuba, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Korea etc. However in this era, this possibility is too remote.

If there is a political crisis due to the border disputes which China and India has between them, the two countries are definitely going to talk to each other either in Beijing or New Delhi or a third country. The big powers will never allow a war between these 2 country’s because both are nuclear armed, both have significant investments from western companies. There will be a brokered peace talks for sure.

China and India are each others largest trading partner. When both are earning so much from each other, why burn their own pockets?

The above 3 points may not necessarily be the only points which could avert a Sino-Indian conflict but are some of the key pioints.

Now coming to the point of Pakistan. A war with Pakistan is very likely however India will not be an attacker here. India has always had concerns with Pakistan sponsoring terrorism. We went to war on this point in 1999 when Pakistan infiltrated into India and they were driven back. We almost went to war in 2001 after the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament and again in 2008 after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. So, it is possible that Pakistan may try to target India through a terrorist attack again and if this does happen, India will definitely hit back. It could be a limited surgical strike or a full fledged attack to take out the terrorist camps. Whichever mode of attack India may chose, I am sure India will take the full world into confidence like it did in 1999.

So in a nutshell, chances of China attacking India are remote, very remote. Chances of Pakistan attacking India and India defending itself are very high.

That is almost impossible! Because Indian army is known for its bravery! Wait,am not going to say we can trash both at a go! Am damn sure that,even though Pak-China attacks India at the same time,Indian army wouldnt retreat.They would give their best. In the mean time, when three nuke-nattions are fighting,the world wont watch.The rest of the community would work even more sincerely to stop the war

India will probably give heavy blows to Pakistan. But china will win within 4-5 days if they attack seriously.
The truth however is China will never attack India directly. Even Pakistan does not do that anymore. It is the era of 4th generation war. Sponsor some redneck jihadi and provide support. China may support Pakistan.
Nobody will come to help of India so soon. India does not have defense agreement with any major power.ANyways this war will never happen unless oil is found in Himalyas.
😛

Mature economies like China and India would like to fight currency and/or trade wars, but seldom war with bombs and planes. As for Pakistan, there are multiple entities operating there, not sure who is in control right now, but a section of their country has been perpetually at war with India.

China has the largest military in the world. India is on the third place. So the war wont be that easy to win. There will be hell a lot of causalities on both sides. On the land war, China will find the first taste of success if the attack starts on summer season. But when the season moves to winter , the same Chinese will be like the goat trapped in the lion’s den. The reason is the mighty Himalayas. Back in 1962, Chinese were on a super winning streak and in the November month they identified that the snowfall in the Himalayas will stop all their supplies and they will be left out and hence they withdrew from the war. The same will happen now also. Fighting a war on Himalayas is damn tough and the terrain is completely different from anywhere in the world. Even aerial fighting wont be good enough. Now consider the other scenario, Pakistan is attacking India from one side and China from another side… It will be a hell time for India. The military itself will find it tough to allocate resources. Pakistan will attack from Jammu side, Punjab side and even Naval forces will be involved. So it will be the doomsday for India. Without any external supports, India will fight it tough to win the war. The valiant military and weapon resource will give India a better fighting stand but not a winning one. Eventually our borders will be compromised and enemy will enter into the state. But at this situation.. India will face a tough decision to make… Nuclear or Not … provided that we have never attacked any country in the whole history of the world, I don’t know how India will use its nuclear artillery in the first place.

Now to the second part… What if China and Pakistan start attacking India… This has much more consequences than the first one. First of all US will intervene and they will use this chance to get a strong hold over China and that means they will support India. As a life long ally, Russia will support India. North Korea obviously will support China . I dont see chances of any European countries involving directly in the war. Now imagine, Russia+US+ India + Japan vs China [ Team A] + Pak + Korea( North)..[Team B]. Team B doesn’t even have a chance. Pakistan will surrender within a month or two. Game over that side. Now China and Korea.. Both of them will be tough to beat . But attacks from all corners will make China stop the war. US and Indian aircraft carriers will round China within no time…Probably they will forced to use nuclear weapon and rest may be history 🙂 …

Economic and socio-political consequences of such a war might be beyond words. Entire world economy might come to a standstill as China is the manufacturing hub of the world… The power shift will happen and world might move to a dark period.

China, the big name.
I can’t just understand why people always overestimate China and neglect the strength of Indian Military. If China attacks India, they have more to lose than us. If we close Chinese import in India, Chinese economy will be bound to lose world’s second populated market. They won’t take such a risk against their economy.
In Military strength, China maybe ahead of India but not too much. There are certain areas of military in which PRC is inferior to India such aircraft carriers, ASW capabilities. China does not have sufficient logistic supply in Tibet. This is where India has upper hand.
In missiles we are behind Chinese but still we have what is sufficient for them. Chinese always show off more than what they actually are.
At present, west is with India to control Chinese progress. We have upper hand over China on diplomatic front. Russia, US, UK, France these permanent members will support a true democratic country i.e. India as they are the same.
Instead of thinking about impact of war on India, people should think about what if India moves to support Tibet and Balochistan by supplying the extremists with arms ? (As it happened in 1971) Then, China and Pakistan will face internal problems and war with India. Why don’t we think in this direction?
India has exercised its capabilities for fighting a two front war on time to time. So we won’t face any serious deployment problems for such a thing. We have our war doctrine ready for in that direction.
In conventional warfare, though being less developed as compared to China, we can give a tough fight to China with whatever we have. Additionally, we will get all kind of weapons and equipment support from US against China.
Thinking about Pakistan, If we block their sea routes, they will surrender within weeks.

Defending troops on highlands need lesser men than attacking lowland troops. . We will manage somehow, and we dont need us or russian direct military help, we can do it ourselves we simply have to defend our highland posts and continue chinese blockade of oil, while garnering international support inviting embargos on china

they will fall like dominos. Pakistan isnt really that significant. If US stops supplying them modern defense equipment they will have neither quality or quantity,we can achieve that by diplomatic missions.

Question: What would happen if Pakistan and China both decide to attack India at the same time?

Answer: Catastrophe, for all the warring nations. Please bear in mind that all the three nations are nuclear armed. Imagine for yourselves what would happen if any of the three nations is cornered. Millions upon millions would die as a result.

Also China and India are two of the biggest economies after USA. The whole world including USA would be extremely worried. UN, USA and most other nations would do their best to stop such a war.

I am upgrading this comment on Henry Leung’s (and even as a reply to Wang) answer for common visibility !!!

Henry Leung has claimed to give a neutral answer, often saying China is not Pak Ally and that INDIA and china are not comparable…

But only after reading their answer and their style of answering, one can understand how witty and selfishly China is behaving and (trying to) bullying/messing everyone whom it thinks it can, often fooling them simultaneously via other forums and platforms by presenting itself as Innocent (forced to for sake of it’s own survival) and and its actions justifiable !!!

As far as War is concerned, Not even in the Dreams, the world’s biggest economy (PPP) would like to mess with World’s Fastest growing, third biggest Economy (and Vice Versa) !!!

You are acting like China itself, being made in china !!!

Sweet sugar coated bully bragger who is concerned only about itself !!!I will show why exactly you are what I said…

Your trade route goes around every possible maritime area in the world… sometimes i feel the only country in China’s world map is China only !!!

If your trade routes passes through Indian Ocean that’s your problem not India’s. Your trade routes have become wandering ghosts, they just pass like from nowhere to everywhere…

When other countries claims maritime territory in south china sea, you have a problem, but you seem to have a license to do “UNGLI” (search it) in every other (read India) country’s backyard in order to save your own interests…JUST LIKE you feel like hitting PHILIPINES OR VIETNAM, India Feels like kicking you when you mess with the Indian Ocean…Its not all about China…that you can justify your problems to India by messing with India… while no one else can do that to you…seriously !!!

Your fishermen have traditional fishing grounds even in INDONESIA’s Exclusive Economic Zones.. while what do you think INDIAN fisherman are doing… Our NAVICs are sailing across the Sky…I feel you should respect their traditional fishing grounds and remove those Anti satellite weapons you have developed for COMMON CHARITY !!!

You will SYMPATHISE with all the perspectives, but never agree with others… since your interest are prime… when you are a selfish bully why the hell care to come on quora only to show you are friends… Foes (read rivals here) disguised as Friends are more dangerous than Enemies!!!

India is NO PAKISTAN that can be fooled by tossing toys to them…

Regarding military might, nobody knows what the other country is cooking up…

If china has underestimated its power display, any reasonably sound defense analyst will accept India to have have a comparable secret weapon system…so don’t brag around beating the bush…Bush couldn’t do that, who are you?

Real might is always shown only in Arena not in media or online forums…so leave that to our respective heroes… may they never have to face each other than to greet…

You will oppose India at every possible International forum but still say you are not allies of Pakistan or whatever… You don’t need to.. since China can be ally of NO ONE…other than itself…Pakistan is idiotic enough to not see through…but Pakistan is Pakistan and you are dealing with INDIA… PAK was with USA, now with you.. tomorrow it might come with any Other Might… It is the Sawant of International Politics….

If you need a secure maritime route… SO DOES INDIA and only more… INDIA is not messing with you, while you are messing with everyone you can…including those YOU SHOULD NOT BE !!! When your Interest come Other’s security can go for a toss, but when they protect theirs you have a problem… I sincerely doubt how innocent China is in the South China Sea…

And competition is never limited to Economy dear… Its about every other sphere… Just because you export more chips than the world can eat 🙂 doesn’t mean you don’t have any competition… I hope you get it… You have literally no actual sense being with Pakistan other than Regional dominance… if there is no competition why is china DUMPING billions (including obsolete technology) in Pakistan when your Chinese companies are finding hard time to get permission to open retail stores in India…

If China is really India’s Friend then, it at least should put away bringing hurdles in India’s way if it can contribute positively (glaring example NSG, UN blocking of anti terrorist resolution). Then it should reconcile its priorities with India’s. India does not assume china to be an Ally, but at least China needs to behave like a neutral friend first, only then China can present itself as a genuine friend. Knife and Honey can’t go hand in hand.

BEHAVE like a FRIEND and then CLAIM to be a FRIEND, Dear !!!

On a parting Note read this to come to senses about the reality of your Great Chinese Economy !!!

India recently tested the interceptor missile which can intercept and destroy any incoming missile miles above the ground. but that doesn’t insure that in case of any war it will give you 100% hit ratio. In case of nuclear war with Pakistan and China. if any upcoming missile dodge the Indian interceptor missile than you can imagine the destruction that will happen.China is never going do this kind of mistake with India because war is fought with good economy. china economy has much dependence on India ans USA markets. Also in case of war USA is going to support India.
but on the other hand Pakistan is run by fanatics,military and bunch of war mongers .
but when it come to Chinese ICBM’S remind you they have the second fastest ICBM in the world Dongfeng series .which is almost impossible to intercept and they are currently developing the Dongfeng-41 which is expected to achieve the top speed mach 25.
current Indian military doesn’t posses the technology to counter these threats from China.

If china wants to get finish then only it will attack on india with pak.

Because pak is going to be deleted very soon from world geography.

And as far as china is concern , nowadays china is taking unnecessary clashes with all countries like phillipines in case of south china sea, it is also denying the verdict of PCA , USA is already looking for a chance to tackle this chinas hegemonic attitude , and to counter it .

One thing is sure that china have more interest in its economic growth than the friendship with pak.

Already china is now seeking help from India in south china sea issue and CPEC which is going through POK and Baluchistan .

China is more concerned about its own interest than Pakistan’s friendship.

Now when pak will attack india , china may not come , because there is no legitimate reason with pak to attack India. If it does so it will be trrrorism and act of aggression.

In that case all countries will unite and stand by India against pak means against trrrorism . and in that case if china comes to rescue pak ,china will have to lost much of it, and will lost big trding partner as well as bilateral relationship with other countries too on the grounds of supporting terrorism .

And china will even lost pak because till then pak will be no more .

Because war between India and pak will be war between anti terrorist and pro terrorist countries and china will have to stand by anti terror group .

why the people outside china think china want to attack india?
if parkstan attack india, the most likely the chinese govt will do is try it best to let both sit in the table, if failed, it will sell missile to you, both of you.
You know, we are business nation………

First off all I am an Indian.
China never invaded India first. It was India who tried to claim Aksai Chin to be Indian territory. When the chinese built a highway, Indian soldiers were sent to take control of the highway. The soldiers who were mostly equipped with lathi(stick/long cane) and PT shoes, were asked to police off the chinese. The Chinese authorities assumed it to be a threat used full military retaliation. They conquered large part of India without any hassle, only to know that India was not a threat but a victim to shit leadership of Nehru and his defense minister VK Krishna Menon. These two waged a war without any previous experience or even caring about its army which was ill equipped.(post this defeat, modernization of army was initiated. They were policy makers who made war policies sitting safely in the parliament while Indian soldiers were left to die at the borders.
China was just enough to go back to its original line of control after stopping the war on humanitarian grounds. They felt for the Indian population who were misinformed by Pre independence leaders like Nehru(
He had blind followers because of Independence struggle). They treated the Indian POWs with medical care and also returned them without any hurt.
Also, India was a hegemon at that time and the next decade, poking its nose into internal matters of other neighbouring states like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc.
It is highly unlikely that China will ever strike India in future because of its past and also because of growing trade relations.
It is very unfortunate that Indian textbooks are modified by the continuously ruling party to portray how great it is in the minds of its people to get votes. It is important to learn things from independent sources not controlled by the ruling party.
I am an Indian who loves India but criticizes its wrong doings of the past.
Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai.

I will not go into analysis but these are some of the probable scenarios that might happen regardless of outcome of war:

1. Pakistan will be become Afghanistan of 80s and 90s. This is because some of Pakistan army top brass will try to fight this war with the help of militants. These militants eventually cannot be controlled by Pakistan.

2. Pakistan will be isolated with sanctions

3. There will be total chaos, unrest and famine. Economy will be in shamble

Now let us talk about a real war if at all it happens:

1. It will be inevitable that Pakistan will use proxies like militants in war. So initial causalities will be a case for India to prove that Pakistan sponsors terrorism once we capture these militants in war in the form of POW

2. China so far maintained that it is a bilateral issue. Hence it will stay out of it. Else, it will be practically inviting US and other allies of India

3. Pakistan cannot afford a traditional war unless it decides to use international aid which in turn will expose its dubious distinction. In other words, no country can support Pakistan unless it can prove that it is under attack which it cannot prove especially if it providing safe havens for terrorists. Let us not forget Osama story. Bottom line is it cannot sustain war even for few days.

Few Submissions before a Short Answer…
(a) China is not a Behemoth we make it out to be.
(b) India is no longer the emaciated nation it was in 1962India is capable of defending itself on two fronts, so if India were attacked by both C..& P… We would stop C and occupy little territory of P..
Economy of all three nations would receive a setback . Worst effected would be P. Chinese is heavily dependent on India as a market, so prices in absence of cheap Chinese goods would be higher but India would emerge better of the three due to robust economy, great market.

There will be great global impact by India Pakistan War. India is the biggest market in the world today. CHINA has a great part of export made to India. USA is also well involved in India as a trading partner. UK depends on India as a market after BREXIT. So India is very well positioned as the the entire world economy depends on India. So CHINA WILL NEVER ATTACK INDIA. USA, UK, EU even the AFRICAN continent will support INDIA.

As for pakistan after Uri attacks, the most asked question today by all Indians is what to do with Pakistan. So we have prepared a video on how India can retaliate, so that we can eradicate the Pakistani problem once and for all.

The first thing we need to understand is why Pakistan, indulges in a Proxy war rather than a full scale conventional war. Proxy war is a type of confrontation between two nations, in which neither engages the other in direct combat. This is highly used in Soviet Afghan war and Vietnam war.

Proxy war has following advantages; it is low cost warfare. So there is no cost of mobilization of army or keeping up with your enemy. On an average it takes 30 to 35 days to train any terrorist. We have seen that America withdrew from Vietnam due to high public pressure as the soldiers got killed and American public panicked. Same was seen in Afghanistan and Iraq. But In a proxy war there is no such Difficulty. As for example, Ajmal Kasab is an unknown young man from a village of Pakistan. In Pakistan he had no future. So people of Pakistan do not care if one ajmal kasab dies. He is an estranged young man without a future for them. But the same is not true if a man of Pakistani army dies. Then it will be all over the news. Everyone will feel for him and if many of them die then there will be pressure on government. In this form of war one side can inflict large damage on the other. As main targets are civilians, who are unarmed and untrained. They are easy targets. So with minimum inputs one can cause maximum damage. In this form of warfare, there is no sovereign involved, so there is no face to blame. No political responsibility at all. You send men unknown and under no flags. So they are fanatical mercenaries rather than soldiers. As only a few men are required at a time. So there is always a low cost in terms of Human Life’s lost to the terrorist state. This tactic involves fear. So people in any area are scared due to frequent attacks and the way of life changes. This technique is used to cause de stability in an area. The most prominent example is Kashmir. Lastly it all looks like a local problem, rather than an attack. Like Mumbai and Pathankot at both places, Pakistan lost few unknown and local estranged youth but created a great impact. So this kind of warfare suits them.

Now I will place two questions before all of us Number One “Can India Start a Conventional war against Pakistan.” Yes why not. It can easily do so. India has the third largest army in the world and the most disciplined army in the world. It has the fourth largest Air force in the world. We have the fourth largest Armoured Core in the world. We have the Seventh Biggest Naval Fleet in the world. But my second question is should India start a full scale war. The answer must be no. Firstly, that’s what Pakistan wants. It has nothing better to do. Its whole country is formed on hatred for India. It cannot do any good for itself and just want to indulge in a war in frustration. Secondly, Pakistan is a failed terrorist state with a very loose finger on its nuclear arsenal. Pakistan will not think twice before using it. Once it uses it, the state of Pakistan is inevitable perished by Indian response but this will also impact india dearly. Pakistan is a suicidal state. It was formed on nonsense grounds; they are not ethnic to that region. They are surrounded and cornered. Pakistan has no mission vision or path as a Nation. So in human term’s it is insane. So we must be careful as we are with any insane person. Also if India’s problem of Pakistan is solved it will no longer need the large arm’s stock it buys from the west. So in our wild dreams we presume that they will support us in a one and for all war against Pakistan. Also if we went to a war we will lose the great economical push we have now.

Now what India can do in this state? Primarily India can focus all attentions in Baluchistan. It is like a primary response toward Pakistani mischief. By causing chaos in Baluchistan, India can cause Pakistan to face a multi facet war in which a weak economy like Pakistan cannot survive. Also the issue can be used to bring international communities attention towards Pakistan’s atrocities in Baluchistan. But the main problem is Baloch Conflict has to be handled with caution, because the conflict will impact regions of Iran and Afghanistan. So we have to see that the conflict stays out of Iran and Afghanistan.

In the CPEC Region or the China Pakistan Economic Corridor there is investment of at least 46 Billion USD by China. . IF INDIA STOPS OR DELAY THIS INVESTMENT IN GILGIT REGION AND BALOCH REGION. BOTH CHINA AND PAKISTAN WILL BE HURT TREMENDOUSLY.

i agree with henry leungs answer and he tried to be unbiased and fair while answering. but i have a few points in which i disagree with him. one thing saying that China needs gwadar for securing their trade routes is very lame and it would only make indians more anxious. let us not forget that china had deployed nuclear submarine on the filmsy pretext to fight against poorly armed pirates in the eastern africa and gulf of aden and that immediately raised eyebrows in India . India has always acknowledged China as an important and powerful neighbor. we were one of the first in international community to recognize it after the communists toppled the nationalist government there in Beijing and we even accepted chinese sovereignty on tibet forgoing the the rights which the colonial british india government had negotiated in 1914 Simla accord . but china has not always responded to india’s outreach. just imagine if India starts increasing its military presence outside china’s backyard , will chinese accept it? then why should chinese do the same against india. Also what is the justification in them saying that Masood Azhar is not a terrorist and evidence against him is not enough? and what about provocative steps like issuing stapled visas for people coming from arunachal pradesh and J&K? (of course later they stopped issuing such visas for people from J&K , but it still continues for people from Arunachal) . how would it be for chinese if india were to do the same thing for people from tibet or xinjiang?

finally i would like to say that if we have to coexist as as neighbours we must be more reasonable rather than being very rigid and stubborn about the nationalist narrative which was fed to us by our governments.

We live in a very different world today than we ever used to. The world is very interlinked and interconnected today. There is absolutely no way China would go to war with India. Both India & China has enough Nuclear weapons to completely wipe out each others population. First of all there is no way even Pakistan will attack India. Pakistan has a very weak army & less international support than India . Every country will sanction Pakistan if it does such stupid thing. If this hypothetical situation ever arrives then consider it end of the world.

Both india and china are almost super power now and as their economy is growing they will both have highest gdp by 2050 . Well I don’t think china will support pakistan if we went on war but pakistan will definitely support china . Now , if we talk about army… chinese are slightly above than indians so it will not be much helpful in war . But india has a plus point Russia will support india , but china do not have such a major power a friend . So the result for india in starting of war will be hazardous but later china will get into big trouble . As china also shares border with Russia ..Now the real scene will arise chinese are type of people who never quits so definitely they will move to use their nuclear power. In response india will also have to use it’s nuclear power . Man we will come to the point of third world war .Now if we talk about the role of Usa , then usa is business he will keep helping the loosing country be selling his crap and at last when both became week .it will put his bases and army to the week one and this will declare the end of war …Now ,if both india and china don’t want to go back to the dark ages like syria and iraq it’s better that they resolve their disputes and became a friend . And lead the world by 2050 as the largest economies..

China and Pakistan will only attack india if they are going to risk it all or World War 3. Since the warfare weapons are much more advanced than last world war, whoever will be losing the war will unleash nuclear weapons which is bad for the economy of any surviving country. USA wont like that china would gain control of major part of south asia, even if Russia is ally of china, they wont that to happen.

If all become crazy and attacks happen, india and pakistan destroyed and china would be at 30-40% strength and then, Russia would attack china. And Asia will come under Russia. It will be then USA and Russia for the finals.

first of all,China won’t do that, as 90 percent of the xiaomi devices are purchased by we Indians 😀

no this is a serious fact i am giving, Chinese market is hot in India and China won’t want to lose such market, so economy is one of a million facts as why China won’t,sorry,can’t attack India

Second of all,Pakistan, i don’t feel afraid mentioning it here, has been attacking India one way or the other for a long time, turn your TV on and you see a news about it every single day.

It’s the open war we are talking about,if Pak declares an open war against India,it is violating a lot of the World policies,making all the other nations its direct enemies, so dear Pak,please think twice before doing anything foolish,and did i forget to mantion Indian capabilities to defend itself?

One of the major reasons of fall various Chinese dynasties and rulers since historical times is due to corruption in their military.
Even presently Chinese military is too corrupt to win a war. And we Indians know the right price of the right guy.
Even if they attack they are bound to withdraw or lose.
On the other hand an Agni missile would do for Pakistan

Lets get down to the ultimate effects of the war (hypothetically if that happens). With nuclear in stock with both the countries, I wonder how will the world would react to that; but it would be a disaster.

Just think about it once. I do not intend to say who would win or who would loose but primarily there will we irrecoverable disaster that would haunt generations to come in both the countries.

So, peace is what should prevail and on go. The question at first place should not be about what would happen if the war breaks but what would happen after the war comes to an end.

Not a chance… each passing day new issuesplus greater talibanization of pak increasing… plus wreath of a billion hindu sikh community… why china risk and what returns.

Also China pak friendship has some cracks… some serious ones….cant disclose more but youll see them in a decade or so. Pak is unhappy with growing chinese soldiers crossing into pak in units patrolling and not allowing any pak army tents nearby. Pak bounded by treaty in future there are chances of rift even upto extent that some area guarded by china rumours are has secretly been offered/given away to china for paks inability to fulfill its financial commitmentto China. Some also suggest pak dont want to lose kashmir issue as kashmiris are not happy with chinese presence and pak has no choice to give away land for faster end to problem.

Secondly due to extremely low costs of defense equipments…. some steel and other parts fitted are secondhand and repaired sold by china as new. This is a confirmed news with severe contract breach but pak cant protest as China is a friend where china is rubbing off hands by being unaware of the whole situation and blaming shortage of new material for pak needs.

Thirdly Pak is also upset with the additional royalty fee of 40percent levied something that will increase its costs significantly namely in ship making and also in its primary jf17s

So enemy enemy doesnt fit here. The concern is how to continue forward the friendship of years without annoying one friend yet stopping him from overstepping on others throat

Imagine you have two neighbours. one bad neighbour who is gunda and keep harassing your daughter. and one good neighbour who is almost equivalent to you. you and your good neighbour meet, have parties, show off wealth and also do some business together.

so your good neighbour will always wish downfall and will secretly support your bad neighbour also. now if your bad neighbour start beating you, then will your good neighbour also start beating you? but infact it will show that it is trying to mediate between you too. he may wish your downfall but to the world he will show that he wants fight to stop. also if fight will start affecting his business he will seriously reprimand the gunda neighbour.

this is exactly going to happen. china will never attack india. pakistan could believing china will attack too. but china will never do that. infact china will show to the world that it is helping india. pakistan will left behind and disintegrate one more time.

There is a loop hole in indian map, there is a region between nepal and bhutan which belongs to india, this a very light strip of indian land which connect india to arunachal pradesh, and if china occupy that strip it will cut of indian reach to arunachal pradesh,nagaland and all other regions, no military can reach there,

So it is obvious that china will attack this region and capture it , in this scenario we can reach arunachal and all region but only with the help of bhutan or bangladesh but they will not help india in war, as china is investing in large scales in bhutan and bangladesh and these 2 countries do not want to unplease china at all.

And if pakistan attack at the same time from jammu and region then we need large army at their, it is going to be a very very fatal condition.

Now the only way india can stand we have to make our army mobile so that our army can move all from jammu to sikkim and arunachal, by building roads, bridges, so we need more roads than weapons here for the army and it will be a huge task and gonna take some time.

So what we can do atleast is post some videos on facebook on youtube, so that we can make this matter a matter of concern for govt and people, there has to be a debate on newspaper, on news talk shows than only govt can invest on these projects.

well there is no doubt if china and pakistan attack india together we will have no chance but yes even if we go alone in war we might loose but there will be no pakistan on world map and half of china and as far as i think US will not like china to dominate asia fully and only india is capable of stopping it. So US will come to india’s aid and we have peace treaty with Russia in time of war we will help russia and russia will help us and if russia opens just nothern front and attack china china will never cope with russia and india combine attackadn there is massive possibilties tibbet and tiawan will rise for indipendence so china can not fight on three frons and if US and europe join hands with india with vietna opening another front china will be surrounded and will be defeated with in 15 days max. Well china will not attack india cause we are competitors in global market but they will attack cause they have expansionist policy they want colonies like britain but they can take control of tibet but never india .

Well according to the most acceptable theory china will not attack India

there are more than one variable involved when any two country goes into war.

these are the situation which according to me is most likely to happen in event of war

first of all there is anti china environment in Asia due to its recent aggression in east china sea which is cause of concern for ASEAN countries and hence they are not only backing up India but also U.S and Russia to back them up against china

secondly in event of war between India Pakistan would be neutralized by United States as stopping them their grant and will increase pressure from institutions like IMF and WORLD BANK to pay up previous loan

also there will be lot of criticism in Pakistan though some will support this decision but max amount of people would be against attacking neighboring country it is a very separate topic anyways

america will favor India for two reason

after South Korea and Japan India is their biggest ally

china is bigger threat to U.S than it is to India

(also american loves war)

the concept of Russia would be neutral in this situation for following reason

1-backing up china means there will be anti Russian environment in Asia

2- it would further push India towards west meaning losing of potential weapon customer and an ally

3-China is a competitor of Russia(though in not that big of a scale)

4-Russia and India have very old and close relationship

Though China may prove itself leader of the world attacking India would be their worst mistake

this attack will some what look like annexation of Tibet hence will be criticized by whole international community including Tibetan people and china might loose Tibet

China will never go on war with india in support of pakistan in real world. Its because we both have civilian leadership that are well aware of the consequences of war unlike pakistan where army leaders rule the decision making. Both china and india aim to be superpowers and the war will through both of us a decade back.

But lets assume in a hypothetical world china gonna support pakistan against india in war then what could happen.?

Pakistan will surely be destroyed.

Both india and china will face huge casuality plus economic crisis.

If nukes would be used then the area would face the consequences for decades to come.

And finally india as well as china would loose the position they have in the world forums.

But in my personal view china will never support pakistan militarily. They could have in 1965 or 1971 or 1999 but since they havent hence they will never.

Although they do support pakistan on world forums.

I like china. It is a huge country that stood on its feet on its own. Cultivated one of the world’s greatest economy. Redefined the word development. But there are few cases i am totally disappointed with china.

1st thing china at this stage cant offord any war with india because it is making many new enemy in south china sea region. China cant use even 50% of its power in war with india because it has to save its south china sea region with is rich in oil and gass every cou try need oil and gass to keep its development on track.. Usa, south korea, japan, australia, philipins, viatnam, and few other more cou try is always ready ready there in south china sea region to stab in back to china.

And i dnt want say anything about pakistan u all know it cant even fight with india’s 25% of army, air and navy power

then russia and USA will be dragged and nukes will also come into use there will be no more pakistan at the cost of more than half of the india china will be stopped by russians depending the weather and if everything fails I am ready to join both armed and un armed resistence even if it cost me my life no mateer what happens afterwards

……why would they want insult themselves again n again in all fields…..and moreover with Pakistan it’s not war but it’s like a mosquito bite…..although mosquitoes can cause life threatening situations too but these are benign ones……sometimes I feel even carrying weapons into war with them is a waste….. mosquito repellents should be good enough…..

Coming to China…..yes respectable formidable side……but I don’t think there would be a war between the two as both are concerned about economic growth rather than think of other petty issues……and China has a huge landmass…….why would it want to increase its work with war and capture India to increase its work……

as far as if u look at the record of all the wars that india has fought like 1947 1962 1965 1971 1999 i can say that if china and pakistan both gang up to attack india then united states and other western countries might come to indias help… as long as china is involved… the proof of it is in 1962 when US president john f kennedy sent a nimitz aircraft carrier in bay of bengal which forced the chinese to vacate arunachal pradesh…

whereas the west remained a mute spectator when it was only india and pakistan…

although since there is so much domestic terrorism and insurgency in all of these 3 countries going to war will lead to complete destablisation of south asia… so its very unlikely they will go to war..

PRACTICALLY THINKING , PAKISTAN AND CHINESE millitary mindsets are very sharp and cruel.. china’s secret plans and stockpiles of weapons is way ahead of india ad pakistan combined.. china does’nt need pakistan’s aid to defeat india.. india is lagging behind in every aspect from china in defense and attack point of view… and pakistan is not a weak country in terms of millitary…many of our missiles and weapons are still in testing and developmental stage.. so deployment of them fully is at a standstill till 2020 atleast…our social media boasts about india’s power so much that our mindset is very positive for india’s millitary condition which is definitely not enough to beat china…we may have a large army but not as large as china…surely if india vs pakistan-china happens… we can destroy pakistan to a very high level… but china… no ways…

even if we keep india’s secret weapons in mind half of them are in manufacturing stage or in developing stage.. which can cannot be operational by 2020…

The Rajputana Liberation Flag

A Sun to represent the Saura-Saka religion of the Rajputs and a yellow band to further emphasize that heritage.

The Rajputana Liberation Movement

The Rajputana Liberation Front was formed with the following objectives:

1. To restore the Rajput civilization of Rajasthan to its former glory and free the Rajputs from the shackles of Brahminist slavery by establishing a sovereign and independent Rajputana or Rajputstan,

2. To restore the ancient Saka civilization of Sakastan and foster greater unity with kindred Saka races such as Gurjurs, Jats, and Gujaratis.

3. To restore the Rajasthani language to its pristine purity by removal of Sanskritic corruptions, to revive the ancient indigenous Mahajani Rajput script by abolishing the Sanskritic Devanagari, and encouraging usage of Rajput rather than Brahmanic grammar.

4. To revive the ancient Rajput-Saura religion of Sun-veneration by declaring it a separate and independent religion in its own right, and not a mere sect of Brahmanism ie. Hinduism.

In all this, the RLF does not advocate the use of violence by Rajputs or other Sakas but uses solely peaceful methods of achieving its objectives.

What is Rajputana?

`Rajputana’ means `Land of Rajputs’ in Rajasthani, it is an indigenous term for `Rajputstan’. Rajputana has been a historical reality since the Sakas entered into India in the centuries following the birth of Christ. They established a large Sakastan which included at its peak the Indus-Ganges Valley and western India. The locus of Sakastan and those regions which have best preserved their Saka heritage are, however, the Rajputana and Gujarat sub-regions. Rajputana was never part of the Indo-Aryan dominated regions of Maharashtra or of Aryavarta. The Saks formed a distinct race with its own civilization and religion. The Rajputs are also not `Hindu’, we are instead Sauras or Sun-worshippers.

Rajputana thus embodies the supreme Saka ideals. It is the firm conviction of the RLF that the preservation of Saka ideals requires an independent Rajputstan. For the last fifty years, the incredible damage done to the Saka heritage of Rajputs has been immense and incalculable. Indeed, the Rajput culture is at grave risk of being wiped out from the face of the Earth. Only independence can lead to a resurrection of the Rajput civilization.

History

During their centuries-long rule of northern India, the Rajputs constructed several palaces. Shown here is the Chandramahal in City Palace, Jaipur, Rajasthan, which was built by the Kachwaha

Rajputs.

OriginsThe origin of the Rajputs is the subject of debate. Writers such as M. S. Naravane and V. P. Malik believe that the term was not used to designate a particular tribe or social group until the 6th century AD, as there is no mention of the term in the historical record as pertaining to a social group prior to that time.[2] One theory espouses that with the collapse of the Gupta empire from the late 6th century, the invading Hephthalites (White Huns) were probably integrated within Indian society. Leaders and nobles from among the invaders were assimilated into the Kshatriya ritual rank in the Hindu varna system, while others who followed and supported them — such as the Ahirs, Gurjars, and Jats – were ranked as cultivators.[1] At the same time, some indigenous tribes were ranked as Rajput, examples of which are the Bundelas, Chandelas, and Rathors. Encyclopaedia Britannica notes that Rajputs “… actually vary greatly in status, from princely lineages, such as the Guhilot and Kachwaha, to simple cultivators.”[1] Aydogdy Kurbanov says that the assimilation was specifically between the Hephthalites, Gurjars, and people from northwestern India, forming the Rajput community.[3] Pradeep Barua also believes that Rajputs have foreign origins, he says their practice of asserting Kshatriya status was followed by other Indian groups thereby establishing themselves as Rajputs.[4] According to most authorities successful claims to Rajput status frequently were made by groups that achieved secular power; probably that is how the invaders from Central Asia, as well as patrician lines of indigenous tribal peoples, were absorbed.[1]

Rajput kingdoms

A royal Rajput procession, a mural at the fort in Jodhpur.[5]See also: List of Rajput dynastiesFrom the beginning of the 7th century, Rajput dynasties dominated North India, including areas now in Pakistan, and the many petty Rajput kingdoms became the primary obstacle to the complete Muslim conquest of Hindu India.[1] These dynasties were disparate: loyalty to a clan was more important than allegiance to the wider Rajput social grouping, meaning that one clan would fight another. This and the internecine jostling for position that took place when a clan leader (raja) died meant that Rajput politics were fluid and prevented the formation of a coherent Rajput empire.[6] Even after the Muslim conquest of the Punjab and the Ganga River valley, the Rajputs maintained their independence in Rajasthan and the forests of central India. Later, Sultan Alauddin Khilji of the Khilji dynasty took the two Rajput forts of Chitor and Ranthambhor in eastern Rajasthan in the 14th century but could not hold them for long.[1]

During the height of Mughal rule in India, most Rajput rulers formed a close relationship with the Mughal emperors and served them in different capacities.[7]The only Rajput ruler who did not submit to Akbar was Rana Pratap of Chittor. However, even his own brother sided with Akbar during the conflict between the two sides.[8] Akbar married Rajput princesses and his heirs, Jahangir, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb could all be considered partly of Rajput extraction by either having mothers or grandmothers who were Rajput. Raja Man Singh I of Amber was one of the most trusted generals of Akbar while his son Mirza Jai Singh served Aurangzeb in a similar capacity. Jai Singh was instrumental in defeating the great Maratha leader Shivaji in 1663.

British colonial period

Mayo College was established by the British government in 1875 at Ajmer, Rajputana to educate Rajput princes and other nobles.

A water reservoir inside Chittorgarh Fort as seen in 2006According to historian Virbhadra Singhji, Rajputs ruled in the “overwhelming” majority of the princely states of Rajasthan and Saurashtra in the British Raj era. These regions also contained the largest concentration of princely states in India, including over 200 in Saurashtra alone.[9]

James Tod, a British colonial official, was impressed by the military qualities of the Rajputs but is today considered to have been unusually enamoured by them. Although the group venerate him to this day, he is viewed by many historians since the late nineteenth-century as being a not particularly reliable commentator.[10][11] Jason Freitag, his only significant biographer, has said that Tod is “manifestly biased”.[12]

The Rajput practices of female infanticide and sati (widow immolation) were other matters of concern to the British colonialists. It was believed that the Rajputs were the primary adherents to these practices, which the British Raj considered savage and which provided the initial impetus for British ethnographic studies of the subcontinent that eventually manifested itself as a much wider exercise in social engineering.[13]

In reference to the role of the Rajput soldiers serving under the British banner, Captain A. H. Bingley wrote:

“Rajputs have served in our ranks from Plassey to the present day (1899). They have taken part in almost every campaign undertaken by the Indian armies. Under Forde they defeated the French at Condore. Under Monro at Buxar they routed the forces of the Nawab of Oudh. Under Lake they took part in the brilliant series of victories which destroyed the power of the Marathas.”[14]

Independent IndiaOn India’s independence in 1947, the princely states, including those of the Rajput, were given three choices: join either India or Pakistan, or remain independent. Rajput rulers of the 22 princely states of Rajputana acceded to newly independent India, amalgamated into the new state of Rajasthan in 1949–1950.[15] Initially the maharajas were granted funding from the Privy purse in exchange for their acquiescence, but a series of land reforms over the following decades weakened their power, and their privy purse was cut off during Indira Gandhi’s administration under the 1971 Constitution 26th Amendment Act. The estates, treasures, and practices of the old Rajput rulers now form a key part of Rajasthan’s tourist trade and cultural memory.[16]

In 1951, the Rajput Rana dynasty of Nepal came to an end, having been the power behind the throne of the Shah monarchs figureheads since 1846.[17]

The Rajput Dogra dynasty of Kashmir and Jammu also came to an end in 1947.[18] though title was retained until monarchy was abolished in 1971 by the 26th amendment to the Constitution of India.[19]

The Rajputs of India are today considered to be a Forward Caste in the country’s system of positive discrimination. This means that they receive no favour from the administration.[20]

SubdivisionsMain article: Rajput clansThere are several major subdivisions of Rajputs, known as vansh or vamsha, the step below the super-division jāti[21] These vansh delineate claimed descent from various sources, and the Rajput are generally considered to be divided into three primary vansh:[22] Suryavanshi denotes descent from the solar deity Surya, Chandravanshi from the lunar deity Chandra, and Agnivanshi from the fire deity Agni.[23] The four prominent clans in the post-Gupta period – Chauhans, Paramaras, Pratiharas and Solankis — all claimed their mythological origin to have been from a sacrificial fire at Mount Abu.[4]

Lesser-noted vansh include Udayvanshi, Rajvanshi,[24] and Rishivanshi.[25] The histories of the various vanshs were later recorded in documents known as vamshāavalīis; André Wink counts these among the “status-legitimizing texts”.[26]

Beneath the vansh division are smaller and smaller subdivisions: kul, shakh (“branch”), khamp or khanp (“twig”), and nak (“twig tip”).[27] Marriages within a kul are generally disallowed (with some flexibility for kul-mates of different gotra lineages). The kul serves as the primary identity for many of the Rajput clans, and each kul is protected by a family goddess, the kuldevi. Lindsey Harlan notes that in some cases, skakhs have become powerful enough to be functionally kuls in their own right.[28]

Culture and ethos

A talwar, developed under Rajputana Khanda in the Maharana Pratap’s periodThe Rajputs were a Martial Race in the period of the British Raj.[29] This was a designation created by administrators that classified each ethnic group as either “martial” or “non-martial”: a “martial race” was typically considered brave and well built for fighting,[30] whilst the remainder were those whom the British believed to be unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyles.[31]

Rajput Lifestyle

The double-edged scimitar known as the khanda was a popular weapon among the Rajputs of that era. On special occasions, a primary chief would break up a meeting of his vassal chiefs with khanda nariyal, the distribution of daggers and coconuts. Another affirmation of the Rajput’s reverence for his sword was the Karga Shapna (“adoration of the sword”) ritual, performed during the annual Navaratri festival, after which a Rajput is considered “free to indulge his passion for rapine and revenge”.[32]

Rajputs generally have adopted the custom of purdah (seclusion of women).[1]

By the late 19th century, there was a shift of focus among Rajputs from politics to a concern with kinship.[33] Many Rajputs of Rajasthan are nostalgic about their past and keenly conscious of their genealogy, emphasizing a Rajput ethos that is martial in spirit, with a fierce pride in lineage and tradition.[34]

Rajput dietThe Anthropological Survey of India identified that in Gujarat, Rajputs are ‘by and large’ non-vegetarians, regular drinkers of alcohol, and also smoke and chew betel leaves.[35] These traits are also followed by Rajputs of Maharashtra with mutton, chicken and fish being consumed, and also pork (which historically dates back to the predilection for Rajput warriors and princes to hone their fighting skills by hunting and eating wild-pig).[36]

Is India on a Totalitarian Path? Arundhati Roy on Corporatism, Nationalism and World’s Largest Vote

As voting begins in India in the largest elections the world has ever seen, we spend the hour with Indian novelist and essayist Arundhati Roy. Nearly 815 million Indians are eligible to vote, and results will be issued in May. One of India’s most famous authors — and one of its fiercest critics — Roy is out with a new book, “Capitalism: A Ghost Story,”which dives into India’s transforming political landscape and makes the case that globalized capitalism has intensified the wealth divide, racism, and environmental degradation. “This new election is going to be [about] who the corporates choose,” Roy says, “[about] who is not going to blink about deploying the Indian army against the poorest people in this country, and pushing them out to give over those lands, those rivers, those mountains, to the major mining corporations.” Roy won the Booker Prize in 1997 for her novel, “The God of Small Things.” Her other books include “An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire” and “Field Notes on Democracy: Listening to Grasshoppers.”

AMY GOODMAN: Voting has begun in India in the largest election the world has ever seen. About 815 million Indians are eligible to vote over the next five weeks. The number of voters in India is more than two-and-a-half times the entire population of the United States. The election will take place in nine phases at over 900,000 polling stations across India. Results will be known on May 16th.Pre-election polls indicate Narendra Modi will likely become India’s next prime minister. Modi is the leader of the BJP, a Hindu nationalist party. He serves—he served as the chief minister of Gujarat, where one of India’s worst anti-Muslim riots occurred in 2002 that left at least a thousand people dead. After the bloodshed, the U.S. State Department revoked Modi’s visa, saying it could not grant a visa to any foreign government official who, quote, “was responsible for or directly carried out, at any time, particularly severe violations of religious freedom.” Modi has never apologized for or explained his actions at the time of the riots.Modi’s main challenger to become prime minister is Rahul Gandhi of the ruling Congress party. Gandhi is heir to the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that’s governed India for much of its post-independence history.Several smaller regional parties and the new anti-corruption Common Man Party are also in the running. If no single party wins a clear majority, the smaller parties could play a crucial role in forming a coalition government.Well, today we spend the hour with one of India’s most famous authors and one of its fiercest critics, Arundhati Roy. In 1997, Roy won the Booker Prize for her novel, The God of Small Things. Since then, she has focused on nonfiction. Her books include An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire, Field Notes on Democracy: Listening to Grasshoppers and Walking with the Comrades. Her latest book is titled Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Nermeen Shaikh and I recently sat down with Arundhati Roy when she was in New York. We began by asking about her new book and the changes that have taken place in India since it opened its economy in the early ’90s.

ARUNDHATI ROY: What we’re always told is that, you know, there’s going to be a trickle-down revolution. You know, that kind of opening up of the economy that happened in the early ’90s was going to lead to an inflow of foreign capital, and eventually the poor would benefit. So, you know, being a novelist, I started out by standing outside this 27-story building that belonged to Mukesh Ambani, with its ballrooms and its six floors of parking and 900 servants and helipads and so on. And it had this 27-story-high vertical lawn, and bits of the grass had sort of fallen off in squares. And so, I said, “Well, trickle down hasn’t worked, but gush up has,” because after the opening up of the economy, we are in a situation where, you know, 100 of India’s wealthiest people own—their combined wealth is 25 percent of the GDP, whereas more than 80 percent of its population lives on less than half a dollar a day. And the levels of malnutrition, the levels of hunger, the amount of food intake, all these—all these, you know, while India is shown as a quickly growing economy, though, of course, that has slowed down now dramatically, but at its peak, what happened was that this new—these new economic policies created a big middle class, which, given the population of India, gave the impression of—it was a universe of its own, with, you know, the ability to consume cars and air conditioners and mobile phones and all of that. And that huge middle class came at a cost of a much larger underclass, which was just away from the arc lights, you know, which wasn’t—which wasn’t even being looked at, millions of people being displaced, pushed off their lands either by big development project or just by land which had ceased to be productive. You had—I mean, we have had 250,000 farmers committing suicide, which, if you even try to talk about, let’s say, on the Indian television channels, you actually get insulted, you know, because it—

NERMEEN SHAIKH: I mean, that’s an extraordinary figure. It’s a quarter of a million farmers who have killed themselves.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah, and let me say that that figure doesn’t include the fact that, you know, if it’s a woman who kills herself, she’s not considered a farmer, or now they’ll start saying, “Oh, it wasn’t suicide. Oh, it was depression. It was this. It was that.” You know?

AMY GOODMAN: But why are they killing themselves?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Because they are caught in a debt trap, you know, because what happens is that the entire—the entire face of agriculture has changed. So people start growing cash crops, you know, crops which are market-friendly, which need a lot of input. You know, they need pesticides. They need borewells. They need all kinds of chemicals. And then the crop fails, or the cost of the—that they get for their product doesn’t match the amount of money they have to put into it. And also you have situations like in the Punjab, where—which was called the “rice bowl of India.” Punjab never used to grow rice earlier, but now—

AMY GOODMAN: In the north of India.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yes, in the north. And it’s supposed to be India’s richest agricultural state. But there you have so many farmer suicides now, land going saline. The, you know, people, ironically, the way they commit suicide is by drinking the pesticide, you know, which they need to—and apart from the fact that the debt, the illness that is being caused by all of this, in Punjab, you have a train called the Cancer Express, you know, where people just coming in droves to be treated for illness and—you know, and—

AMY GOODMAN: And the train is called the Cancer Express?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yes, it’s called the Cancer Express. And—

AMY GOODMAN: Because of the pesticide that they’re exposed to?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah, and they are. And this is the richest state in India, you know—I mean agriculturally the richest. And there’s a crisis there—never mind in places like, you know, towards the west, Maharashtra and Vidarbha, where, you know, farmers are killing themselves almost every day.

AMY GOODMAN: I was wondering if you could read from Capitalism: A Ghost Story.

ARUNDHATI ROY: So, “In India, the 300 million of us who belong to the new, post-IMF’reforms’ middle class—the market—live side by side with the spirits of the nether world, the poltergeists of dead rivers, dry wells, bald mountains and denuded forests; the ghosts of 250,000 debt-ridden farmers who have killed themselves, and the 800 million who have been impoverished and dispossessed to make way for us. And who survive on less than half a dollar, which is 20 Indian rupees, a day.

“Mukesh Ambani is personally worth $20 billion. He holds a majority controlling share in Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), a company with a market capitalization of $47 billion and global business interests that include petrochemicals, oil, natural gas, polyester fibre, Special Economic Zones, fresh food retail, high schools, life sciences research and stem cell storage services. RIL recently bought 95 per cent shares in Infotel, a TV consortium that controls 27 TV news and entertainment channels in almost every regional language.

“RIL is one of a handful of corporations that run India. Some of the others are the Tatas, Jindals, Vedanta, Mittals, Infosys, Essar. Their race for growth has spilled across Europe, Central Asia, Africa and Latin America. Their nets are cast wide; they are visible and invisible, over-ground as well as underground. The Tatas, for example, run more than 100 companies in 80 countries. They are one of India’s oldest and largest private sector power companies. They own mines, gas fields, steel plants, telephone, cable TV and broadband networks, and they run whole townships. They manufacture cars and trucks, and own the Taj Hotel chain, Jaguar, Land Rover, Daewoo, Tetley Tea, a publishing company, a chain of bookstores, a major brand of iodized salt and the cosmetics giant Lakme—which I think they’ve sold now. Their advertising tagline could easily be: You Can’t Live Without Us.

“According to the rules of the Gush-Up Gospel, the more you have, the more you can have.”

AMY GOODMAN: Arundhati Roy, reading from her new book, Capitalism: A Ghost Story. We’ll be back with her in a minute.[break]AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, as we continue our conversation with the world-renowned author Arundhati Roy. Voting has just begun in India in the largest election the world has ever seen. About 815 million Indians are eligible to vote over the next five weeks. The number of eligible voters in India is larger than the total population of the United States and European Union combined. Arundhati Roy won the Booker Prize in 1997 for her novel, The God of Small Things. Her latest book is called Capitalism: A Love Story [sic]. Democracy Now!‘s — Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Democracy Now!‘s Nermeen Shaikh and I talked to Arundhati Roy about the changes in India she describes in her latest book and the implications for the elections.

ARUNDHATI ROY: So, I’m talking about how, when you have this kind of control over all business, over the media, over its essential infrastructure, electricity generation, information, everything, then you just field your, you know, pet politicians. And right now, for example, what’s happening in India is that one of the reasons that is being attributed to the slowdown of the economy is the fact that there is a tremendous resistance to all of this from the people on the ground, from the people who are being displaced, from the—and in the forests, it’s the Maoist guerrillas; in the villages, it’s all kinds of people’s movements—all of whom are of course being called Maoist. And now, there is a—you see, these economic policies—these new economic policies cannot be implemented unless—except with state—with coercive state violence. So you have a situation where the forests are full of paramilitary just burning villages, you know, pushing people out of their homes, trying to clear the land for mining companies to whom the government has signed, you know, hundreds of memorandums of understanding. Outside the forests, too, this is happening. So there is a kind of war which, of course, always existed in India. There hasn’t been a year when the Indian army hasn’t been deployed against its own people. I mean, I’ll talk about that later—

AMY GOODMAN: Since when?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Since independence, since 1947, you know? But now the plan is to deploy them. Now it’s the paramilitary. But this new election is going to be who is the person that the corporates choose, who is not going to blink about putting the Indian—about deploying the Indian army against the poorest people in this country, you know, and pushing them out to give over those lands, those rivers, those mountains, to the major mining corporations. So this is what we are being prepared for now—the air force, the army, going in into the heart of India now.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Before we go to the elections, could you—one of the operations, the military operations, you talk about is Operation Green Hunt.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Could you explain what that is, when it started, and who it targets?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Well, Operation Green Hunt, basically—you know, in 2004, the current government signed a series of memorandums of understanding with a number of mining corporations and infrastructure development companies to build dams, to do mining, to build roads, to move India into the space where, as the home minister at the time said, he wanted 75 percent of India’s population to live in cities, which is, you know, moving—social engineering, really, moving 500 million people or so out of their homes. And so, then they came up against this very, very militant resistance from the ground. As I said, in the forests, there were armed Maoist guerrillas; outside the forest, there are militant, you know, some call themselves Gandhians, all kinds. There’s a whole diversity of resistance but, although strategically they had different ways of dealing with it, were all fighting the same thing. So then, in the state of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, which are where there are huge indigenous populations—

NERMEEN SHAIKH: In central India.

ARUNDHATI ROY: In central India—the first thing the government did was to—very similar to what happened in places like Peru and Colombia, you know, they started to arm a section of the indigenous population and create a vigilante army. It was called the Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh. The Salwa Judum, along with local paramilitary, went in and started decimating villages, like they basically chased some 300,000 people out of the forests, and some 600 villages were emptied. And then the people began to fight back. And really, this whole Salwa Judum experiment failed, at which point they announced Operation Green Hunt, where there was this official declaration of war.

And there was so much propaganda in the media. As I explain to you now, the media is owned by the corporations who have vested interests. So there was this—you know, the prime minister came out and said, “They are the greatest internal security threat.” And, you know, there was this kind of conflation between the Maoists with their ski caps and, you know, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and all these people who are threatening the idea of India.

What the government wasn’t prepared for was the fightback, not just from the people in the forest, but even from a range of activists, a range of people who were outraged by this. And, you know, they passed these laws which meant that anybody could be called a Maoist and, you know, a threat to security. And thousands—even today, there are thousands of people in jail under sedition, under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and so on. And—but that was Operation Green Hunt. But that, too, ran aground, because it’s very difficult terrain and—you know, so now the idea is to deploy the army. And now the corporations feel that this past government hadn’t—didn’t have the nerve to send out the army, that it blinked. And so—

AMY GOODMAN: This is the Congress party.

ARUNDHATI ROY: The Congress party and its allies. So now all the big corporations are backing the chief—the three-times chief minister of the state of Gujarat, the western state of Gujarat, who has proved his mettle, you know, by being an extremely hard and cold-blooded chief minister, who is now—I mean, he is, of course, best known for having presided over a pogrom against Muslims in Gujarat.

AMY GOODMAN: So talk about who Modi is—I mean, this moves us into the election of April; it’s going to be the largest election in the world—who the contenders are, who this man is who could well become the head of India, who the United States has not granted a visa to in years because of what you’re describing.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Well, who is Narendra Modi? I think he’s, you know, changing his—changing his idea of who he himself is, you know, because he started out as a kind of activist in this self-proclaimed fascist organization called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the RSS, which was founded in 1925, who the heroes of the RSS were Mussolini and Hitler. Even today, you know, their—the bible of the RSS was written by a man called Golwalkar, you know, who says the Muslims of India are like the Jews of Germany. And so, they have a very clear idea of India as a Hindu nation, very much like the Hindu version of Pakistan.

AMY GOODMAN: Where, you’re saying, the Muslims should be eradicated.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Where they should be either made to live as, I think, second-class citizens and—

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Or they should move to Pakistan.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah, or they should move to Pakistan. Or if they don’t behave themselves, they should just be killed, you know? So, this is a very old—you know, Modi didn’t invent it. But he was—he and even the former BJP prime minister, Vajpayee, the former home minister, Advani—all of these are members of the RSS. The RSS is an organization which has 40,000 or 50,000 units across India, extremely—I mean, they were at one point banned because a former member of the RSS killed Gandhi. But now—you know, now they are of course not a banned organization, and they work—

AMY GOODMAN: Killed Mahatma Gandhi.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah, assassinated him. But that—but, so, Modi started out as a worker for the RSS. He, of course, came into great prominence in 2002, when he was already the chief minister of Gujarat but had been losing local municipal elections. And this was at the time when the BJP had run this big campaign in—they had demolished the Babri Masjid, this old 14th century mosque, in 1992. But they were now saying, “We want to build a big Hindu temple in that place.” And a group of pilgrims who were returning from the site where this temple was supposed to be built, the train in which they were traveling, the compartment was set on fire, and 58 Hindu pilgrims were burned. Nobody knows, even today, who set that compartment on fire and how it happened. But, of course, it was immediately, you know, blamed on Muslims. And then there followed an unbelievable pogrom in Gujarat, where more than a thousand people were lynched, were burned alive. Women were raped. Their abdomens were slit open. Their fetuses were taken out and so on. And not only that—

AMY GOODMAN: These were Muslims.

ARUNDHATI ROY: These were Muslims, by these Hindu mobs. And it became very clear that they had lists, they had support. The police were, you know, on side of the mobs. And, you know, 100,000 Muslims were driven from their homes. And this happened in 2002, this was 12 years ago. And subsequently, they have been—you know, the killers themselves have come on TV and boasted about their killing, come on—in sting operations. But the more they boasted, the more it became—I mean, for people who thought other people would be outraged, in fact it worked as election propaganda for Modi.

And even now, though he took off his sort of saffron turban and his red tikka and then put on a sharp suit and became the development chief minister, and yet, you know, when—recently, when he was interviewed by Reuters and asked whether he regretted what happened in 2002, he more or less said, “You know, I mean, even if I were driving a car and I drove over a puppy, I would feel bad,” you know? But he very expressly has refused to take any responsibility or regret what happened.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: But that’s one of the extraordinary things that you describe in the book, is that following liberalization and the growth of this enormous middle class, 300 million, there was a simultaneous shift, gradual shift, to a more right-wing, exclusive, intolerant conception of India as a Hindu state. So, simultaneously, this class embraces neoliberalism, the neoliberalism in India, and also a more conservative Hindu ideology. So can you explain how those two go together, and how in fact, along with what you said now about Modi, how that might play out in this election?

ARUNDHATI ROY: You know, whenever I speak in India, I say that in the late ’80s what the government did was they opened two locks. One was the lock of the free—of the market. The Indian market was not a free market, not an open market; it was a regulated market. They opened the lock of the markets. And they opened the lock of the Babri Masjid, which for years had been a disputed site, you know, and they opened it. And both those locks—the opening of both those locks eventually led to two kinds of totalitarianisms. One—and they both led to two kinds of manufactured terrorisms. You know, so the lock of the open market led to what are now being described as the Maoist terrorist, which includes all of us, you know, all of us. Anybody who’s speaking against this kind of economic totalitarianism is a Maoist, whether you are a Maoist or not. And the other, you know, the Islamist terrorist. So, what happens is that both the Congress party and the BJP has different prioritizations for which terrorist is on the top of the list, you know? But what happens is that whoever wins the elections, they always have an excuse to continue to militarize.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: So the two main parties who are contesting this election are Congress, which is the ruling party now, and the BJP, the Bharatiya Janata Party, of which Narendra Modi is the head. And you’ve said that the only difference between them is that one does by day what the other does by night, so as far as these policies are concerned, you can see no difference, irrespective of who wins.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Yeah, well, you know, when it comes down to the wire, I agree with what I’ve said. And yet, you know, there is something to be said for hypocrisy, you know, for doing things by night, because there’s a little bit of tentativeness there; there isn’t this sureness of, you know, “We want the Hindu nation, and we want the rule of the corporations,” and so on. But, yes, I mean, what happens is that everybody knows. It’s like whoever is in power gets 60 percent of the cut, and whoever is not in power gets 40 percent. That’s how the corporates work. You know, they have enough money to pay the government and the opposition. And all these institutions of democracy have been hollowed out, and their shells have been placed back, and we continue this sort of charade in some ways.

AMY GOODMAN: Indian writer Arundhati Roy, author of the new book, Capitalism: A Ghost Story. India is in the midst of the largest election in world history. We’ll be back with Arundhati Roy in a minute.[break]AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman. Together with Nermeen Shaikh, we sat down with the world-renowned author Arundhati Roy when she came to the United States last week. Arundhati Roy won the Booker Prize in 1997 for her novel The God of Small Things. She begins with a reading from her new book,Capitalism: A Ghost Story.

ARUNDHATI ROY: “Which of us sinners was going to cast the first stone? Not me, who lives off royalties from corporate publishing houses. We all watch Tata Sky, we surf the net with Tata Photon, we ride in Tata taxis, we stay in Tata Hotels, sip our Tata tea in Tata bone china and stir it with teaspoons made of Tata Steel. We buy Tata books in Tata bookshops. We eat Tata salt. We are under siege.

“If the sledgehammer of moral purity is to be the criterion for stone-throwing, then the only people who qualify are those who have been silenced already. Those who live outside the system; the outlaws in the forests or those whose protests are never covered by the press, or the well-behaved dispossessed, who go from tribunal to tribunal, bearing witness and giving testimony.”

But this—you know, I’m talking about this because, as I said, you know, for the poor, India has the army and the paramilitary and the air force and the displacement and the police and the concentration camps. But what are you going to do to the rest? And there, I talk about the exquisite art of corporate philanthropy, you know, and how these very mining corporations and the people who are involved in, really, the pillaging of not just the poor, but of the mountains, of the rivers, of everything, are now—have now turned their attention to the arts, you know? So, apart from the fact that, of course, they own the TV channels and they fund all of that, they, for example, fund the Jaipur Literary Festival—Literature Festival, where the biggest writers in the world come, and they discuss free speech, and the logo is shining out there behind you. But you don’t hear about the fact that in the forest the bodies are piling up, you know? The public hearings where people have the right to ask these corporations what is being done to their environment, to their homes, they are just silenced. They are not allowed to speak. There are collusions between these companies and the police, the Salwa Judum, which I was talking about earlier.

And, you know, the whole—the whole way in which capitalism works is not just as simple as we seem—as it seems to be. We don’t even understand the long-term game, you know? And, of course, America is where it began, in some ways, with foundations like the Rockefeller and the Ford and the Carnegie. And what was—what was their idea? You know? How did it start? It was—now it seems like part of your daily life, like Coca-Cola or coffee or something, but in fact it was a very conceptual leap of the business imagination, when a small percentage of the massive profits of these steel magnates and so on went into the forming of these foundations, which then began to control public policy. You know, they really were the people who gave the seed money for the U.N., for the CIA, for the Foreign Relations Council. And how did they then—when U.S. capitalism started to move outwards, to look for resources outwards, what roles did the Rockefeller and Ford and all these play? You know, how did—for example, the Ford Foundation was very, very crucial in the imagining of a society like America which lived on credit, you know? And that idea has now been imported to places like Bangladesh, India, in the form of microcredit, in the form of—and that, too, has led to a lot of distress, to a lot of killing, this kind of microcapitalism.

AMY GOODMAN: These corporate foundations you talk about, how are they evidenced in India?

ARUNDHATI ROY: Which ones? You mean—

AMY GOODMAN: Like the Ford, the Carnegie, the Rockefeller.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Rockefeller. Well, you know, I mean, in this, I’ve talked about the role not just in India, but even in the U.S. For example, how do they even—how do they deal with things like political people’s movements? How did they fragment the civil rights movement? I’ll just read you a part about what happened with the civil rights movement.

“Having worked out how to manage governments, political parties, elections, courts, the media and liberal opinion, the neoliberal establishment faced one more challenge: how to deal with the growing unrest, the threat of ’people’s power.’ How do you domesticate it? How do you turn protesters into pets? How do you vacuum up people’s fury and redirect it into a blind alley?

“Here too, foundations and their allied organizations have a long and illustrious history. A revealing example is their role in defusing and deradicalizing the Black Civil Rights movement in the United States in the 1960s and the successful transformation of Black Power into Black Capitalism.

“The Rockefeller Foundation, in keeping with J.D. Rockefeller’s ideals, had worked closely with Martin Luther King Sr. (father of Martin Luther King Jr). But his influence waned with the rise of the more militant organizations—the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and the Black Panthers. The Ford and Rockefeller Foundations moved in. In 1970, they donated $15 million to ‘moderate’ black organizations, giving people grants, fellowships, scholarships, job training programs for dropouts and seed money for black-owned businesses. Repression, infighting and the honey trap of funding led to the gradual atrophying of the radical black organizations.

“Martin Luther King made the forbidden connections between Capitalism, Imperialism, Racism and the Vietnam War. As a result, after he was assassinated, even his memory became toxic to them, a threat to public order. Foundations and Corporations worked hard to remodel his legacy to fit a market-friendly format. The Martin Luther King Center for Nonviolent Social Change, with an operational grant of $2 million, was set up by, among others, the Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Mobil, Western Electric, Procter & Gamble, U.S. Steel and Monsanto. The Center maintains the King Library and Archives of the Civil Rights Movement. Among the many programs the King Center runs have been projects that work—quote, ‘work closely with the United States Department of Defense, the Armed Forces Chaplains Board and others,’ unquote. It co-sponsored the Martin Luther King Jr. Lecture Series called—and I quote—’The Free Enterprise System: An Agent for Non-violent Social Change.’”

It did the same thing in South Africa. They did the same thing in Indonesia, you know, with the—General Suharto’s war, which all of us now know about because of The Act of Killing in Indonesia. And very much so in even places like India, where they move in and they begin to NGO-ize, say, the feminist movement, you know? So you have a feminist movement, which was very radical, very vibrant, suddenly getting funded, and not doing—it’s not that the funded organizations are doing terrible things; they are doing important things. They are doing—you know, whether it’s working on gender rights, whether it’s with sex workers or AIDS. But they will, in their funding, gradually make a little border between any movement which involves women, which is actually threatening the economic order, and these issues, you know? So, in the forest, when I went and spent weeks with the guerrillas, you had 90,000 women who were members of the Adivasi Krantikari Mahila Sangathan, this revolutionary indigenous women’s organization, but they are threatening the corporations, they are threatening the economic architecture of the world, by refusing to move out of there. So they’re not considered feminists, you know? So how you domesticate something and turn it into this little—what in India we call paltu shers, you know, which is a tame tiger, like a tiger on a leash, that is pretending to be resistance, but it isn’t.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: But before we conclude, Arundhati Roy, you have not written a novel—you’re probably sick of being asked this question—since The God of Small Things. And you said that you may return to novel writing now as a more subversive way of being political. So could you either talk about what you intend to write or what you mean by that?

ARUNDHATI ROY: I’ve been writing straightforward political essays for 15—almost 15 years now. And often, they are interventions in a situation that seems to be closing down, you know, whether it was on the dam or whether it was about privatization or whether it was about Operation Green Hunt. And I feel now that, you know, in some ways, through those very urgent political essays, which are all interconnected—they are not just separate issues, they are all interconnected, and they are, together, presenting a worldview. Now I feel that I don’t have anything direct to say without repeating myself, but I think what—you know, that understanding, which was not just an understanding I had in the past and I was just preaching to my readers, you know; it was I was learning as I wrote and as I grew. And I feel that fiction now will complicate that more, because I think the way I think has become more complicated than nonfiction, straightforward nonfiction, can deal with. You know, so I need to break down those proteins and write in a way which—I don’t have to write overtly politically, because I don’t believe that—I mean, I think what we are made up of, what our DNA is and how we are wired, will come out in literature without making a great effort to raise slogans. And—

AMY GOODMAN: Before we end, and before you come out with this next novel that we’ll ask you to read next time when you come to the United States, I was wondering if you could read from an earlier essay. It’s an excerpt that you read at the New School, when hundreds of people came out to see you here recently.

ARUNDHATI ROY: Well, it was—it was really the first—in a way, the first political essay I wrote, anyway, after The God of Small Things, and it was an essay called “The End of Imagination,” when the Indian government conducted a series of nuclear tests in 1998.

“In early May (before the bomb), I left home for three weeks. I thought I would return. I had every intention of returning. Of course, things haven’t worked out quite the way I planned.” Of course, by which I meant that India just wasn’t the same anymore.

“While I was away, I met a friend of mine whom I have always loved for, among other things, her ability to combine deep affection with a frankness that borders on savagery.

“’I’ve been thinking about you,’ she said, ‘about The God of Small Things — what’s in it, what’s over it, under it, around it, above it…’

“She fell silent for a while. I was uneasy and not at all sure that I wanted to hear the rest of what she had to say. She, however, was sure that she was going to say it. ‘In this last year,’ she said, ‘less than a year actually—you’ve had too much of everything—fame, money, prizes, adulation, criticism, condemnation, ridicule, love, hate, anger, envy, generosity—everything. In some ways it’s a perfect story. Perfectly baroque in its excess. The trouble is that it has, or can have, only one perfect ending.’ Her eyes were on me, bright with a slanting, probing brilliance. She knew that I knew what she was going to say. She was insane.

” She was going to say that nothing that happened to me in the future could ever match the buzz of this. That the whole of the rest of my life was going to be vaguely unsatisfying. And, therefore, the only perfect ending to the story would be death. My death.

“The thought had occurred to me too. Of course it had. The fact that all this, this global dazzle—these lights in my eyes, the applause, the flowers, the photographers, the journalists feigning a deep interest in my life (yet struggling to get a single fact straight), the men in suits fawning over me, the shiny hotel bathrooms with endless towels—none of it was likely to happen again. Would I miss it? Had I grown to need it? Was I a fame-junkie? Would I have withdrawal symptoms?

“I told my friend there was no such thing as a perfect story. I said in any case hers was an external view of things, this assumption that the trajectory of a person’s happiness, or let’s say fulfillment, had peaked (and now must trough) because she had accidentally stumbled upon ‘success.’ It was premised on the unimaginative belief that wealth and fame were the mandatory stuff of everybody’s dreams.

“You’ve lived too long in New York, I told her. There are other worlds. Other kinds of dreams. Dreams in which failure is feasible. Honorable. And sometimes even worth striving for. Worlds in which recognition is not the only barometer of brilliance or human worth. There are plenty of warriors that I know and love, people far more valuable than myself, who go to war each day, knowing in advance that they will fail. True, they are less ‘successful’ in the most vulgar sense of the word, but by no means less fulfilled.

“The only dream worth having, I told her, is to dream that you will live while you’re alive and die only when you’re dead.

“’Which means exactly what?’

“I tried to explain, but didn’t do a very good job of it. Sometimes I need to write to think. So I wrote it down for her on a paper napkin. And this is what I wrote: To love. To be loved. To never forget your own insignificance. To never get used to the unspeakable violence and the vulgar disparity of life around you. To seek joy in the saddest places. To pursue beauty to its lair. To never simplify what is complicated or complicate what is simple. To respect strength, never power. Above all, to watch. To try and understand. To never look away. And never, never to forget.”

A chronology of Indian atrocities in Kashmir and the rest of the neighboring countries Part-2

The Indian security forces have flouted all norms of civilized conduct. Kashmiri youths have been murdered in cold blood in fake encounters and Kashmiri women of all ages were and are gang-raped in the presence of their families. International human rightsorganizations and the international press has been refused entry into the State by the Indian government.

Even this horrifying imbalance of 1 soldier for every 6 Kashmiris (majority of who are old men, women and children) has failed to suppress the freedom movement.

Huge chunks of the region come under draconian laws like the Armed Forces Special Protection Act or the Disturbed Areas Act, which have been in place in Manipur, Nagaland and many parts of Assam, thereby covering a significant geographical chunk of NortheastIndia for more than two decades.

These Acts essentially give the security forces a free hand in doing what they please as long as it’s under the guise of “fighting terror” laws was that of the custodial death of Thangjam Manorama in Manipur, where the AFSPA had been enforced for over 25years.

Witnesses say Manorama was picked up on July 11th 2004 by soldiers of the paramilitary Assam Rifles from her home on alleged charges of links with separatist rebels. The next day, her dead body was reportedly found four kilometers away from her home in thestate capital Imphal, with multiple bullet wounds and signs of torture.

The entire state came to a standstill under the backlash of huge protests following the brutal and tragic death.

India did not outlaw Hindu practice of forced temple prostitution until 1988.

India withheld Pakistan’s share of funds and resources from the very beginning of its birth. The newborn nation financed its treasury with donated silverware from ordinary citizens and funds from the Nizam of Hyderabad, Habib family.

India withheld 297 trainloads of supplies allocated to Pakistan. (3 trainloads were sent with scrap).

Krishna Menon wrote a private letter to Mountbatten on 14 June 1947 warning him with dire consequences for the future of Anglo-Indian relations, if the State of Jammu and Kashmir were permitted to go to Pakistan. India threatened England in order to take Gurduspurand Ferozpur allocated to Pakistan.

India swallowed Junagarh on the basis of majority Hindu against the wishes of its nawab who had acceded to Pakistan.

India swallowed Kashmir on the basis of the maharaja ‘wishes’ irrespective of the Muslim majority’s wishes. The instrument of ascension was conveniently “lost”.

Tripura, a knobble of land protruding south into Bangladesh, is home to native tribals and Bengalis.

Most of the latter, who make up three-quarters of the population of 3 million, arrived as refugees from Bangladesh after its independence in 1971.

There are two main separatist rebel groups, the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and the All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF). Both want independence for the tribal areas of the state and the removal of Bengali immigrants, and both have attacked the Bengali-speaking community as well as kidnapping their political opposition.

Attacks on Bengalis in northern Tripura have displaced tens of thousands of people.

Another major cause of displacement was the building by India of a fence along the border with Bangladesh, during which tens of thousands of people were evicted from their homes.

Meanwhile, Tripura is also home to thousands of people who have fled fighting in the neighbouring state of Mizoram.

Tripura is a state in North-East India, with an area of 4,036 sq. mi. or 10,453 km². Population: @ 3 200 000. Tripura is surrounded by Bangladesh on the north, south, and west. The Indian states of Assam and Mizoram lie to the east. The capital is Agartala and the main languages spoken are Bengali and Kokborok (also known as Tripuri). It was formerly an independent Tripuri kingdom and was merged with independent India on 15 October 1949 by the Tripura Merger Agreement. It was also known as Hill Tippera (anglicized version of Tipra) during the British Raj period and has a history of over 2500 years and 186 kings. More at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripura and http://www.twipra.com/Services/Articles/ShowDocument?articleID=f063eacf35c154f6

“Prior to the merger with Indian union in Oct. 15, 1949, Twipra, a princely independent state was a peaceful and self-sufficient endowed with all resources of revenue and income. After the partition (1947) of the Indian subcontinent (India and Pakistan) and the subsequent merger of Twipra with India, there had been unprecedented influx of foreign nationals in to the state of present Twipra, particularly the Bengali Hindus from erstwhile East Pakistan, now Bangladesh and mainland India. Before the merger the Borok people who were in absolute majority in their own homeland (Twipra) and accounted for more than 99% of the total population of the present state of Twipra, have now been reduced to a mere 31% (as per 2001 Census) in the state. In fact, Twipra is the only state in India and one of the few places in the world in the 20th century whose indigenous people have been transformed from being a numerical majority and ruling community in to a minority with almost no economic and political back bone within 56 years of the merger (i.e. 1949-2005). Such a dramatic change in the demographic profile of the state has had wide ranging economic, political, cultural, religious and social implications for its people. But till now there has been no protective measures taken by either the Twipra state Government or the central to prevent the unabated process of infiltration in to the state. Thus, the demographic profile of the state has threatened the very existence of the Borok people in their native land. If this trend continues in Twipra for another 50 years the Borok people will certainly be wiped out from the demographic scene of Twipra state.”

James B. Minahan (Encyclopedia of the Stateless Nations – Ethnic and National Groups Around the World – volume IV) presents a flag of the Tripuris: “The Tripuri national flag, the flag of the national movement, is a pale blue field bearing a single green five-pointed star on the upper hoist.” Mr.Minahan doesn’t specify what “national movement” it can be.Chrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009

NLFT – National Liberation Front of Tripura

image by Chrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009

Ethnic conflict in Tripura is described in considerable detail at: http://k.1asphost.com/borok/Ethnic_Clash_in_Tripura.aspAmong many liberation organization in Tripura / Twipra the most important are NLFT – National Liberation Front of Tripura, ATTF – All Tripura Tiger Force and BNCT – Borok National Council of Tripura.“The National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) was formed on March 12, 1989, with Dhananjoy Reang (former Vice-President of the Tripura National Volunteers) as its “chairman”. Reang after being “expelled” from the NLFT in 1993 formed a separate outfit, the Tripura Resurrection Army (TRA), but surrendered in the year 1997. After Reangâ€™s removal, Nayanbasi Jamatiya became leader of the outfit and later Biswamohan Debbarma took over. However, another split occurred in September 2000 following differences between the Halam and Debbarma tribal members of the NLFT. Thus, the Borok National Council of Tripura (BNCT) was formed by Jogendra alias Joshua Debbarma. Personal ambitions of the leaders and parochial religious considerations are believed to have caused yet another split in 2001 when Nayanbasi Jamatiya and Biswamohan Debbarma parted ways from the parent outfit to have factions of the NLFT under their respective leaderships. Further, the fourth split is said to have occurred in June 2003 when Biswamohan Debbarma was deposed allegedly at the behest of NLFT’s patrons inside Bangladesh and Mantu Koloi was placed as the leader of that faction. Debbarma is reported to have subsequently set up separate camps on the Tripura-Bangladesh border with his followers.

The NLFT was outlawed in April 1997 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, following its involvement in terrorist and subversive activities. It is also proscribed under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), 2002.

FLAG: The Flag of NLFT (or TNLF – Twipra National Liberation Front – that’s how they prefer to be called) shall be Tri-colour in the ratio of 3:2 size(length to breadth) comprising of green, white and red colour and a star shall be affixed on the middle of green portion.(1) Green colour – It signifies ‘Sovereignty’ of the land (country) where we live.(2) White colour – It signifies ‘Peace’ of the land who are peace loving and they shall continue to fight/struggle for their peaceful means.(3) Red colour – It signifies ‘Revolution’. The peace loving people will get down to revolution to achieve their goals/right at the cost of even bloodshed if it so warranted.(4) Star – A star on the green portion of the Flag signifies to be the guiding anchor for the whole Borok nation.

The All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF) was originally founded as All Tripura Tribal Force on July 11, 1990, by a group of former Tripura National Volunteers (TNV) terrorists, who under the leadership of Ranjit Debbarma dissociated themselves from a faction of the TNV led by Lalit Debbarma which surrendered arms in accordance with the August 1988 Accord concluded between the TNV and the Union government. According to the ATTF, the outfit rechristened itself as All Tripura Tiger Force by substituting the word ‘Tribal’ with ‘Tiger’ sometime in 1992.

It was initially a small group of tribal freedom fighters who operated in pockets of North and South Tripura districts. Gradually, it began mobilising manpower by recruiting tribal youth and enhancing the firepower of its cadres. And by year 1991, it emerged as a formidable independence group in Tripura. However, more than 1,600 cadres surrendered by March 1994, under an amnesty scheme offered by the State Government. A group of ATTF cadres which did not surrender revived the ATTF. It was subsequently banned in April 1997 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Over the years, the ATTF either formed or was associated with independence groups such as the Tripura Tribal Youth Force (TTYF), the Tripura Liberation Organization (TLO),

the Tripura Young Rifle (TYR), the Tripura Lion Force (TLF) and the Tripura National Army (TNA).

According to the available literature, the outfit’s objectives are:1. Expulsion of all Bengali-speaking immigrant settlers who entered Tripura after 1956.2. Restoration of land to tribals under ‘Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act’, 1960.3. Removal of names of migrants who entered Tripura after 1956 from the electoral roll.More at: http://satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/tripura/terrorist_outfits/attf.htm

All Tripura Tiger Force has a beautiful flag – a tiger in full sprint on the green field. Chrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009

I wonder if a faulty zoology is at play here, because the animal is spotted, not striped, and looks rather like a cheetah at first sight?Knut, 24 February 2011

Also, it might be questioned if the tiger should be depicted in natural colors; the Constitution of the All Tripura Tiger Force, Article No. 14 – Flag and Symbol says:

(i) A. The flag will be coloured as green base with red colour organisation symbol. The measurement of the flag will be 3 :2.(ii) B. In case if need the symbol of the flag with its colour will be changed.

Unfortunately, there is no further description of what that symbol is. Obviously, from the name of the organization it would be logical to think it may include a tiger, but that is not explicitly stated. And whatever it is, the main version should have it in red, although variants are possible.Ned Smith, 26 February 2011

Tribal Youth Federation

image by Chrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009

There is also the flag of the “Tribal Youth Federation (in Bengali Upajati Juba Federation) which is an organization affiliated to Democratic Youth Federation of India in Tripura. TYF organizes youth from the tribal populations of the state. TYF has a separate central committee and publishes Bini Kharad (Our Voice). The supreme body of TYF is the Central Conference. TYF was founded in 1967 to counter the influence of Tripura Upajati Juba Samiti. TYF works in close coordination with Ganamukti Parishad and is often considered as the youth wing of GMP.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_Youth_FederationChrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009

Borok National Council of Twipra

The flag of Borok National Council of Twipra (Tripura) Chrystian Kretowicz, 19 April 2009